Skip to content
aiqbench takeAI Research

aiqbench analysis

For multi-objective reinforcement learning in humanoid robots, adopting a dual-critic architecture significantly outperforms unified critics by preventing locomotion gradients from suppressing learned manipulation behaviors. This architectural choice alone yields a 3.5x speedup in target reaching and doubles throughput, demonstrating that structural design decisions often outweigh reward engineering efforts. Researchers refining pre-trained policies should prioritize separating reward signals to maintain behavioral integrity during sequential curriculum training.
Source coveringarXiv
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

Critic Architecture Matters: Dual vs. Unified Critics for Humanoid Loco-Manipulation

arXiv3 min read

arXiv:2606.11891v1 Announce Type: cross 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 present a controlled comparison on the Unitree G1 humanoid (23 active DoF) in NVIDIA Isaac Lab, training loco-manipulation policies through a sequential curriculum spanning 13 levels from stationary reaching to walking with variable-orientation targets. In standardized evaluation, dual-critic policies reach targets 3.5$\times$ faster (6.5 vs. 22.6 simulation steps), achieve 2$\times$ higher throughput (14.3 vs. 7.0 validated reaches per 1,000 steps), and attain higher validated reach rates (65.2% vs. 53.8%) compared to the unified-critic policy. Notably, additional anti-gaming reward mechanisms provide no further improvement beyond the architectural change alone (60.9% vs. 65.2%). These results have direct implications for the emerging paradigm of RL fine-tuning of imitation-learned policies: when refining a pre-trained manipulation policy with RL, a unified critic risks suppressing the learned behavior through competing locomotion gradients. These findings demonstrate that critic architecture is a primary - and often overlooked - design choice in multi-objective humanoid RL, with greater impact than reward engineering on reaching efficiency.

Title:Critic Architecture Matters: Dual vs. Unified Critics for Humanoid Loco-Manipulation

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 present a controlled comparison on the Unitree G1 humanoid (23 active DoF) in NVIDIA Isaac Lab, training loco-manipulation policies through a sequential curriculum spanning 13 levels from stationary reaching to walking with variable-orientation targets. In standardized evaluation, dual-critic policies reach targets 3.5$\times$ faster (6.5 vs. 22.6 simulation steps), achieve 2$\times$ higher throughput (14.3 vs. 7.0 validated reaches per 1,000 steps), and attain higher validated reach rates (65.2% vs. 53.8%) compared to the unified-critic policy. Notably, additional anti-gaming reward mechanisms provide no further improvement beyond the architectural change alone (60.9% vs. 65.2%). These results have direct implications for the emerging paradigm of RL fine-tuning of imitation-learned policies: when refining a pre-trained manipulation policy with RL, a unified critic risks suppressing the learned behavior through competing locomotion gradients. These findings demonstrate that critic architecture is a primary - and often overlooked - design choice in multi-objective humanoid RL, with greater impact than reward engineering on reaching efficiency.

Accepted at the ICRA 2026 Workshop on Reinforcement Learning for Imitation Learning (RL4IL), Vienna, Austria. 4 pages, 2 figures

Robotics (cs.RO); Machine Learning (cs.LG)

arXiv:2606.11891 [cs.RO]

(or arXiv:2606.11891v1 [cs.RO] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2606.11891 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 · 324 words

Related coverage