SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2606.05533

What Objects Enable, Not What They Are: Functional Latent Spaces for Affordance Reasoning

Abstract

Existing robot planning systems rely on appearance-based reasoning, where visual observations are encoded into latent spaces organized around object appearances (e.g., recognizing a "cart" based on how it looks). However, planning requires reasoning about task-relevant functionalities of objects (e.g., whether an object is "movable"), which appearance-based latent spaces do not capture. As a result, existing approaches struggle to generalize to novel robot-object interactions. We address this limited generalizability through affordance reasoning, enabling planning based on task-relevant object functionalities instead of appearance alone. We introduce A4D, which maps visual observations into a shared latent space structured around affordances (e.g., "movable"). By projecting visual observations into this functional latent space and measuring their proximity to affordances, A4D infers functionalities relevant to the observed object. Furthermore, we introduce an affordance discovery mechanism that expands the latent space to handle unseen scenarios where existing affordances are insufficient. A4D uses proximity in the functional latent space to quantify uncertainty in affordance inference and selectively triggers affordance discovery. We evaluate A4D across several planning tasks involving diverse and unseen affordances. A4D achieves 94% inference accuracy on existing affordances outperforming state-of-the-art approaches by over 15% points, improves new-affordance inference accuracy from 70% to over 90% with fewer than 10% of the original training data, and enables 100x faster inference. Code, videos, and data available at: https://A4Dance-reasoning.github.io.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Rohan Siva, Neel P. Bhatt, Yunhao Yang, Seoyoung Lee, Nishant Gadde, Christian Ellis, Alvaro Velasquez, Zhangyang Wang, Ufuk Topcu. 2026-06-04. What Objects Enable, Not What They Are: Functional Latent Spaces for Affordance Reasoning. https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.05533

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

AUC Maximization from Biased Positive-unlabeled Data with Confidence

Maximizing the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) is a standard approach to imbalanced binary classification. Although positive and negative data are required for maximizing the AUC, negative data are often difficult to collect in some real-world applications due to privacy concerns or the need for specialized expertise to annotate them. Thus, AUC maximization from positive and unlabeled (PU) data has been attracting attention. Existing methods assume that labeled positive data are unbiased samples from the true positive distribution. However, this ideal assumption is often violated in practice. In this paper, we propose a method to maximize the AUC from biased PU data. To address the bias, our key idea is to exploit {\it confidence}, i.e., the probability that an instance is positive, associated with the small number of labeled positive data. We derive an estimator of the AUC risk using biased PU data with confidence, enabling AUC maximization under such bias. We further show that the rewritten AUC risk induces a Bayes-optimal AUC ranking even when the available confidence is any strictly increasing transformation of the true posterior probability. We experimentally show the effectiveness of our method on eight real-world datasets.

cs.LG

Measuring the Value of World-Model Updates: A Counterfactual Utility Protocol for Continual Adaptation

Continual world models must decide whether new data justify changing the model. Fixed replay schedules and prediction-error triggers specify when to update, but neither reveals the value of an individual update: one deployment run cannot show how the same model would have performed at that moment had it held its parameters. We introduce the fork ledger, which branches a deployment stream at pre-registered decision points into matched update and hold continuations under common random numbers. It evaluates both continuations on the same episodes and records $\Delta R = R_{\mathrm{update}} - R_{\mathrm{hold}}$. Always applying one fixed update mechanism lowers return on all three simulated control tasks: CartPole ($-144.0$; checkpoint-bootstrap $95\%$ CI $[-185.4,-116.1]$, against a converged return near $650$), Walker ($-82.8$; $[-101.1,-61.7]$) and Cheetah ($-18.6$; $[-29.0,-6.6]$). Divergence is an outcome of applying the update, so the estimand counts every attempted fork; restricted to the $693$ of $720$ that did not collapse, CartPole and Walker are unchanged in sign ($-113.4$ and $-82.1$) and Cheetah becomes unresolved ($-3.9$; $[-17.5,+13.0]$). The task is the unit of inference: each contributes $240$ attempted forks over five pretrained checkpoints crossed with two drift directions. The ledger makes counterfactual utility observable for a fixed mechanism, allowing triggers to be judged by the updates they select rather than by surprise detection alone.

cs.LG

When More Is Not Better: Component Anti-Synergy in a P300 Speller

P300 brain-computer interface (BCI) spellers can provide hands-free communication for people with severe motor impairments. Modern pipelines combine multiple individually promising components, often assuming that 'more-is-better'. We tested this assumption using a four-component full-factorial experiment varying the inclusion of Euclidean Alignment (EA), xDAWN spatial filtering, subject calibration, and language model priors on a public P300 dataset. Performance was evaluated using accuracy, repetitions, and information transfer rate (ITR) with mixed-effects models. Results show that the value of components is conditional rather than additive. Calibration was the strongest singular contributor, while EA compensated for its absence in zero-calibration settings. Adding independently useful components could also reduce performance, revealing component anti-synergy. Contrary to conventional wisdom, LM support was not universally beneficial: its effect depends strongly on the strength of the underlying EEG pipeline, while results from a larger LM showed a similar pattern. Together, these findings challenge maximal 'all-on' pipeline design and highlight the value of selecting spatial and language-support components according to the quality of available EEG evidence.

cs.LG