aiqbench analysis
This research introduces a critical benchmark for continual imitation learning that distinguishes between mere task retention and genuine language grounding in robotic policies. By perturbing instructions while maintaining semantic meaning, the study reveals that high performance on standard metrics does not guarantee that learned behaviors remain correctly guided by their linguistic commands. These diagnostics are essential for advancing robust, interpretable robot systems where language intent must persist across successive learning stages without degradation.
Does Continual Imitation Learning Remain Grounded? A Language-Perturbed Benchmark for Robotic Task Retention
arXiv:2610.00542v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Continual imitation learning evaluates whether a robot can learn new knowledge without forgetting previously learned skills. However, retaining task performance does not ensure the behavior remains grounded in language because policies may rely on scene cues, object associations, or memorized task structure. We introduce a benchmark protocol to study how language-guided behavior changes as robotic policies learn successive tasks. We construct meaning-preserving and meaning-changing instruction variants for the Goal, Spatial, Object, and Long suites of LIBERO. Policy experiments focus on LIBERO-Goal, evaluating Original and Paraphrase instructions after each continual-learning stage. We compare representative continual imitation learning methods under their original assumptions while separating task competence from language sensitivity. The proposed diagnostics complement standard learning and forgetting metrics by measuring semantic robustness, goal adaptation, and language sensitivity. Results show that strong continual-learning performance does not always translate to reliable language grounding, and our diagnostics help determine whether retained skills remain correctly guided by their instructions. Additional materials are available at https://sites.google.com/view/stillgrounded
Title:Does Continual Imitation Learning Remain Grounded? A Language-Perturbed Benchmark for Robotic Task Retention
Abstract:Continual imitation learning evaluates whether a robot can learn new knowledge without forgetting previously learned skills. However, retaining task performance does not ensure the behavior remains grounded in language because policies may rely on scene cues, object associations, or memorized task structure. We introduce a benchmark protocol to study how language-guided behavior changes as robotic policies learn successive tasks. We construct meaning-preserving and meaning-changing instruction variants for the Goal, Spatial, Object, and Long suites of LIBERO. Policy experiments focus on LIBERO-Goal, evaluating Original and Paraphrase instructions after each continual-learning stage. We compare representative continual imitation learning methods under their original assumptions while separating task competence from language sensitivity. The proposed diagnostics complement standard learning and forgetting metrics by measuring semantic robustness, goal adaptation, and language sensitivity. Results show that strong continual-learning performance does not always translate to reliable language grounding, and our diagnostics help determine whether retained skills remain correctly guided by their instructions. Additional materials are available at this https URL
Robotics (cs.RO)
arXiv:2610.00542 [cs.RO]
(or arXiv:2610.00542v1 [cs.RO] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.00542 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 · 268 words
Related coverage
Latent reasoning architectures would likely undermine CoT, our strongest oversight tool
AI Alignment Forum · Sep 23, 2026

The Machines that Make the Machines
NVIDIA · Oct 7, 2026
J++ Lens: Jacobian Filtering Enables More Faithful Workspace Lenses
LessWrong · Oct 8, 2026
What's Continual Learning, and Why Might We Expect To See It In Advanced LLM Agents?
LessWrong · Jun 12, 2026