Searcharxiv⌕ Search

arXiv subjects

Tuan Duong Trinh

Publications and source records attributed to Tuan Duong Trinh.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Altered Thoughts, Altered Actions: Reasoning Chain as Control Surface for a Vision-Language-Action Policy

Vision-language-action policies map camera images and natural-language instructions to a robot's motor actions. Some of these policies are designed to reason in text before acting, generating a reasoning chain and decoding actions conditioned on that chain. The works introducing this design offer the reasoning chain as an oversight interface: text a person can read and edit to correct the policy. What an edited reasoning chain does to the policy's motor actions, whether it repairs them or corrupts them, has so far been measured only in part. We measure both directions, repair and corruption, with our deterministic entity swap applied to the instruction the policy receives and to the reasoning chain it generates. A forty-task observed backdrop across all four LIBERO simulation suites reveals that the cost of corrupting the reasoning chain concentrates where language alone determines the goal. There, on LIBERO-Goal, we run the counterfactual intervention with DeepThinkVLA, chosen because its reasoning chain is exposed as plain text. The policy receives a corrupted instruction, but its reasoning chain is replaced by the one it generates when that instruction is clean. This counterfactually correct reasoning chain recovers 47.8 pp of the lost success, our pre-registered confirmatory test. Had the chain merely restated what the camera image already determines, the replacement could have changed nothing. Instead, all 10 tasks move in the predicted direction, though success falls short of the clean runs by 38.0 pp, a gap we had predicted at 5-15 pp. The reasoning chain is therefore a working control surface: text written into it moves the robot, repairing behaviour when the text is right and corrupting it when the text is wrong. Whether to expose such a control surface is a deployment tradeoff, and part of it can now be measured.

cs.RO↗

Reasoning as a Double-Edged Sword: Architecture and Cross-Stage Robustness in Vision-Language-Action Models

Does adding a reasoning step make a Vision-Language-Action (VLA) model more robust to perturbation? Intuitively, a policy that reasons before acting should absorb a perturbed input better than one that maps observations directly to actions. We test this premise head-on across three models that span the reasoning spectrum (no reasoning, a text chain-of-thought, and a latent iterative loop), perturbing each at the vision, reasoning, and action stages on LIBERO and SimplerEnv. Two questions organize the study: does the reasoning design shift robustness, and can the reasoning be read back at runtime as a safety signal? We find that the latent-iterative model is by far the least robust: under both stochastic noise and white-box perturbation its task success collapses, while the other two hold. This fragility is structural rather than cumulative: varying the reasoning depth at inference barely moves it. Reasoning outputs can in principle be monitored, but the monitors fail under fair tests. A plan--action consistency probe that looks near-perfect under naive evaluation falls to chance under adaptive attack. Under matched-FPR calibration, fusing it with an action-anomaly probe never lifts defended success above undefended. Scoped to these output-level behavioral probes under white-box vision-stage attack, this ceiling is a precondition that any viable defense must first satisfy.

cs.RO↗