aiqbench analysis
Composing insight from the full article — this may take a moment.
CalVLA: Shaping Native Confidence in Vision-Language-Action Policies with Outcome Supervision
arXiv:2611.00394v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Can a vision-language-action (VLA) policy signal likely task failure from its own action probabilities? We introduce CalVLA, which shapes native action-token confidence using successful and failed rollouts and an Action-Confidence Alignment (ACal) squared margin-ranking loss. Low-rank adapters update OpenVLA-7B without an auxiliary failure detector. Observations are paired within tasks at similar normalized elapsed times, not necessarily equivalent physical progress. On a held-out test split from 500 LIBERO-10 configurations, adapted confidence achieves a joint failure-discrimination AUROC of $0.7392\pm0.0480$ over three seeds, averaging scores at 130 and 260 steps. Frozen-policy probes reach 0.6146--0.6436, but superiority over the linear probe is statistically inconclusive. For the same confidence summary, AUROC rises from 0.4485 before adaptation to 0.7327 after adaptation. Mean task success decreases from 58% to 55%. These results show improved failure discrimination, not improved control or established safety benefits.
Abstract:Can a vision-language-action (VLA) policy signal likely task failure from its own action probabilities? We introduce CalVLA, which shapes native action-token confidence using successful and failed rollouts and an Action-Confidence Alignment (ACal) squared margin-ranking loss. Low-rank adapters update OpenVLA-7B without an auxiliary failure detector. Observations are paired within tasks at similar normalized elapsed times, not necessarily equivalent physical progress. On a held-out test split from 500 LIBERO-10 configurations, adapted confidence achieves a joint failure-discrimination AUROC of $0.7392\pm0.0480$ over three seeds, averaging scores at 130 and 260 steps. Frozen-policy probes reach 0.6146--0.6436, but superiority over the linear probe is statistically inconclusive. For the same confidence summary, AUROC rises from 0.4485 before adaptation to 0.7327 after adaptation. Mean task success decreases from 58% to 55%. These results show improved failure discrimination, not improved control or established safety benefits.
8 pages, 2 figures. Accepted at the Science of Physical AI Safety (SPAIS) Workshop, CoRL 2026
Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Robotics (cs.RO)
arXiv:2611.00394 [cs.AI]
(or arXiv:2611.00394v1 [cs.AI] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2611.00394 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 248 words