SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2508.05342

Information-Theoretic Graph Fusion with Vision-Language-Action Model for Policy Reasoning and Dual Robotic Control

Abstract

Teaching robots dexterous skills from human videos remains challenging due to the reliance on low-level trajectory imitation, which fails to generalize across object types, spatial layouts, and manipulator configurations. We propose Graph-Fused Vision-Language-Action (GF-VLA), a framework that enables dual-arm robotic systems to perform task-level reasoning and execution directly from RGB and Depth human demonstrations. GF-VLA first extracts Shannon-information-based cues to identify hands and objects with the highest task relevance, then encodes these cues into temporally ordered scene graphs that capture both hand-object and object-object interactions. These graphs are fused with a language-conditioned transformer that generates hierarchical behavior trees and interpretable Cartesian motion commands. To improve execution efficiency in bimanual settings, we further introduce a cross-hand selection policy that infers optimal gripper assignment without explicit geometric reasoning. We evaluate GF-VLA on four structured dual-arm block assembly tasks involving symbolic shape construction and spatial generalization. Experimental results show that the information-theoretic scene representation achieves over 95 percent graph accuracy and 93 percent subtask segmentation, supporting the LLM planner in generating reliable and human-readable task policies. When executed by the dual-arm robot, these policies yield 94 percent grasp success, 89 percent placement accuracy, and 90 percent overall task success across stacking, letter-building, and geometric reconfiguration scenarios, demonstrating strong generalization and robustness across diverse spatial and semantic variations.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Shunlei Li, Longsen Gao, Jin Wang, Chang Che, Xi Xiao, Jiuwen Cao, Yingbai Hu, Hamid Reza Karimi. 2025-08-07. Information-Theoretic Graph Fusion with Vision-Language-Action Model for Policy Reasoning and Dual Robotic Control. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inffus.2026.104193

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