SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2503.06814

Unlocking Generalization for Robotics via Modularity and Scale

Abstract

How can we build generalist robot systems? Scale may not be enough due to the significant multimodality of robotics tasks, lack of easily accessible data and the challenges of deploying on physical hardware. Meanwhile, most deployed robotic systems today are inherently modular and can leverage the independent generalization capabilities of each module to perform well. Therefore, this thesis seeks to tackle the task of building generalist robot agents by integrating these components into one: combining modularity with large-scale learning for general purpose robot control. The first question we consider is: how can we build modularity and hierarchy into learning systems? Our key insight is that rather than having the agent learn hierarchy and low-level control end-to-end, we can enforce modularity via planning to enable more efficient and capable robot learners. Next, we come to the role of scale in building generalist robot systems. To scale, neural networks require vast amounts of diverse data, expressive architectures to fit the data and a source of supervision to generate the data. We leverage a powerful supervision source: classical planning, which can generalize, but is expensive to run and requires access to privileged information to perform well in practice. We use these planners to supervise large-scale policy learning in simulation to produce generalist agents. Finally, we consider how to unify modularity with large-scale policy learning to build real-world robot systems capable of performing zero-shot manipulation. We do so by tightly integrating key ingredients of modular high and mid-level planning, learned local control, procedural scene generation and large-scale policy learning for sim2real transfer. We demonstrate that this recipe can produce a single, generalist agent that can solve challenging long-horizon manipulation tasks in the real world.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Murtaza Dalal. 2025-03-10. Unlocking Generalization for Robotics via Modularity and Scale. https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.06814

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

IMLE-VLA: Fast Single-Step Action Generation for Vision-Language-Action Policies

Vision-language-action (VLA) policies leverage pretrained vision-language backbones to achieve strong cross-task generalization. A leading design couples this backbone with a dedicated continuous action head trained via diffusion or flow matching. However, such heads rely on iterative multi-step sampling, for example 10 Euler steps in $\pi_{0.5}$. This creates an inference bottleneck that produces stop-and-go movement in the robot and slower task completion. We introduce IMLE-VLA, which replaces the iterative action head with a single-step conditional generator trained via conditional Implicit Maximum Likelihood Estimation (cIMLE). The cIMLE objective promotes multimodal action coverage, avoiding the mode collapse of naive regression heads while eliminating multi-step sampling entirely. When IMLE-VLA is applied to $\pi_{0.5}$, it increases inference frequency 3.67x (55 Hz vs. 15 Hz), enabling up to 11x higher action throughput. On the 40-task LIBERO benchmark, IMLE-VLA achieves the highest average success rate (98.0%) among all baselines while leading in inference frequency. Under the test-time perturbations of LIBERO-plus, IMLE-VLA retains $\pi_{0.5}$'s robustness while other baselines degrade sharply, confirming that the cIMLE head preserves generalization. Real-world experiments on a Franka Emika Panda across four tasks demonstrate smoother motion (2.2x to 3.0x lower jerk) and faster task completion, with IMLE-VLA outperforming $\pi_{0.5}$ on every task and reducing average VLA inference time per episode by 3.9x to 6.6x. Videos and code are available at https://kianhk6.github.io/IMLE-VLA/

cs.RO

ObstaDiff: Generalizable Diffusion Policy Learning via Obstacle-aware Representations

Imitation learning has achieved impressive results in robotic manipulation, yet most existing approaches assume clean backgrounds and lack explicit mechanisms for obstacle-aware motion generation. Extending such policies to cluttered, real-world scenes with unstructured obstacles remains a key generalization challenge. We present ObstaDiff, a decomposed diffusion-policy framework with a lightweight obstacle-aware visual encoder. ObstaDiff extracts a structured target-obstacle-background representation, enabling the downstream alignment policy to generate end-effector trajectories toward a target-centered bottleneck pose while reasoning about surrounding obstacles. We evaluate ObstaDiff on 61 real-robot greenhouse trials per method (366 executions in total). ObstaDiff achieves 75.41% average task success and 8.20% average obstacle collision rate, outperforming representative imitation-learning baselines and improving generalization in cluttered agricultural scenes.

cs.RO

Testing Between the Test Cases: Proving End-to-End Steering in Conditions You Never Drove

AI-based automated vehicle testing is challenging because a model that passes every test condition can still fail in the real world. Formal verification offers a way to directly address this gap. On a simulated highway and an arterial road we trained two small end-to-end steering networks each in CARLA, one on clear conditions alone and one on clear, fog, night and low sun. All four models were driven against a 2.19 ft lane-departure budget. Without driving again, we used bound propagation, a formal method that reads the trained weights, to compute how far steering can drift at every disturbance strength between two captured images. One calculation covers more than a campaign could drive: on the arterial it spans 133 poses, where ten intensities each would be 10^133 combinations, in minutes on one GPU. Not only did formal verification find conditions that broke the clear-trained policy without simulation testing, it provided some preliminary evidence for potential failures between the test cases. Our overall conclusion is that formal verification is a viable complement to simulation, and could be adopted as a part of verification and validation for automated driving.

cs.RO