aiqbench analysis
This study demonstrates that using separate critics for disjoint reward signals in humanoid reinforcement learning significantly outperforms a single unified critic, achieving faster convergence and higher task throughput on the Unitree G1 platform. The findings suggest that architectural choices regarding value estimation are critical design variables when fine-tuning imitation-learned policies to balance locomotion and manipulation objectives.
Critic Architecture Matters: Dual vs. Unified Critics for Humanoid Loco-Manipulation
arXiv:2606.11891v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Multi-objective reinforcement learning for humanoid robots must coordinate locomotion and manipulation within a single policy. A natural design choice is whether to use a single (unified) critic that estimates the combined value of all objectives, or separate (dual) critics with disjoint reward signals. We compare the two on the Unitree G1 humanoid (23 active DoF, of which 17 are policy-controlled) in NVIDIA Isaac Lab, training loco-manipulation policies through sequential curricula that progress from stationary reaching to walking with variable-orientation targets. Under a matched compute budget, the dual-critic run reaches targets 3.5x faster (6.5 vs. 22.6 simulation steps), achieves 2x higher throughput (14.3 vs. 7.0 validated reaches per 1,000 steps), and attains a higher validated reach rate (65.2% vs. 53.8%) than the unified-critic run in a standardized evaluation. Adding five anti-gaming reward mechanisms on top of the dual critic yields no further improvement (60.9% vs. 65.2%). We report this as an efficiency gap between two trained policies rather than an isolated effect of the critic: the two runs also differ in curriculum schedule, arm action dimensionality and one locomotion reward weight, and each is a single seed. The results are nonetheless suggestive for the emerging paradigm of RL fine-tuning of imitation-learned policies, where a unified critic may suppress pre-trained arm behavior through competing locomotion gradients. We argue that critic architecture deserves explicit treatment as a design variable in multi-objective humanoid RL, and specify the single-variable ablation required to establish its causal contribution. Code, trained checkpoints and a project page are available at https://mturan33.github.io/critic-architecture-matters/
Abstract:Multi-objective reinforcement learning for humanoid robots must coordinate locomotion and manipulation within a single policy. A natural design choice is whether to use a single (unified) critic that estimates the combined value of all objectives, or separate (dual) critics with disjoint reward signals. We compare the two on the Unitree G1 humanoid (23 active DoF, of which 17 are policy-controlled) in NVIDIA Isaac Lab, training loco-manipulation policies through sequential curricula that progress from stationary reaching to walking with variable-orientation targets. Under a matched compute budget, the dual-critic run reaches targets 3.5x faster (6.5 vs. 22.6 simulation steps), achieves 2x higher throughput (14.3 vs. 7.0 validated reaches per 1,000 steps), and attains a higher validated reach rate (65.2% vs. 53.8%) than the unified-critic run in a standardized evaluation. Adding five anti-gaming reward mechanisms on top of the dual critic yields no further improvement (60.9% vs. 65.2%). We report this as an efficiency gap between two trained policies rather than an isolated effect of the critic: the two runs also differ in curriculum schedule, arm action dimensionality and one locomotion reward weight, and each is a single seed. The results are nonetheless suggestive for the emerging paradigm of RL fine-tuning of imitation-learned policies, where a unified critic may suppress pre-trained arm behavior through competing locomotion gradients. We argue that critic architecture deserves explicit treatment as a design variable in multi-objective humanoid RL, and specify the single-variable ablation required to establish its causal contribution. Code, trained checkpoints and a project page are available at this https URL
Accepted at the ICRA 2026 Workshop on Reinforcement Learning for Imitation Learning (RL4IL), Vienna. 5 pages, 2 figures. v2: corrects the unified-critic run's curriculum level (10 of 40) and per-run environment counts, adds a Confounding Factors section, and softens the causal framing; measurements unchanged. this https URL
Robotics (cs.RO); Machine Learning (cs.LG)
arXiv:2606.11891 [cs.RO]
(or arXiv:2606.11891v2 [cs.RO] for this version)
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 314 words
Related coverage
Critic Architecture Matters: Dual vs. Unified Critics for Humanoid Loco-Manipulation
arXiv · Jun 12, 2026

Dharma vs Adharma - The Perplexity of Being Alive
hillpost.in · Aug 25, 2026

[AINews] Reality Checks on AI News (Yegge shuts down Gas Town, Databricks’ +60% Astra cost)
Latent Space · Sep 17, 2026

NVIDIA Vera CPU: Olympus Cores Built for Maximum Single-Thread Performance in Agentic AI
NVIDIA · Jul 21, 2026