aiqbench analysis
This paper presents a rigorous benchmark for long-horizon household robot planning, evaluating how different algorithms handle uncertainty in internal models and external environments. The study compares ReAct, VLM-TAMP, and Tru-POMDP across 1,350 episodes, revealing that accurate initial memory does not guarantee superior performance and identifying specific failure modes like placement errors. These findings are critical for advancing robust autonomous agents capable of operating reliably in imperfect real-world conditions.
Evaluating Long-Horizon Robot Planning under Uncertainty
arXiv:2610.17326v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Household robots must successfully navigate im-perfect circumstances, both in their internal models and the external world. We introduce a benchmark of seven long-horizon household tasks in Habitat that vary initial robot memory and environment configurations. We evaluate adaptations of ReAct, VLM-TAMP, and Tru-POMDP within a shared execution framework across 90 tasks-environment-memory combinations, totaling 1,350 episodes. Our evaluation measures task success, partial completion, and action efficiency, along with rule-based analysis of execution traces. ReAct achieves the highest overall task success (45.3%) and completion (71.7%), while having accurate initial memory does not consistently yield the highest performance for every planner. We identify recurring placement errors, precondition errors, and redundant actions through trace analysis. These findings highlight differences in how the evaluated planners use initial knowledge and respond to uncertainty.
Abstract:Household robots must successfully navigate im-perfect circumstances, both in their internal models and the external world. We introduce a benchmark of seven long-horizon household tasks in Habitat that vary initial robot memory and environment configurations. We evaluate adaptations of ReAct, VLM-TAMP, and Tru-POMDP within a shared execution framework across 90 tasks-environment-memory combinations, totaling 1,350 episodes. Our evaluation measures task success, partial completion, and action efficiency, along with rule-based analysis of execution traces. ReAct achieves the highest overall task success (45.3%) and completion (71.7%), while having accurate initial memory does not consistently yield the highest performance for every planner. We identify recurring placement errors, precondition errors, and redundant actions through trace analysis. These findings highlight differences in how the evaluated planners use initial knowledge and respond to uncertainty.
Robotics (cs.RO)
arXiv:2610.17326 [cs.RO]
(or arXiv:2610.17326v1 [cs.RO] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.17326 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 · 220 words
Related coverage
The J-Space Debate, Agent Swarms, and Pacing Frontier AI - Digital Minds Newsletter #4
LessWrong · Sep 18, 2026
Safe Embodied AI for Long-horizon Tasks: A Cross-layer Analysis of Robotic Manipulation
arXiv · Jun 6, 2026

2026 BAIR Graduate Showcase
BAIR Blog · Jul 1, 2026
ContactWorld: What Matters in Vision-Tactile World Models for Contact-Rich Manipulation
arXiv · Jun 16, 2026