Skip to content
aiqbench takeAI Research

aiqbench analysis

This research quantifies how specific wording choices in reference descriptions impact the retrieval accuracy of robot task instructions within the RLBench benchmark. By comparing various lexical rankers, the study demonstrates that character n-gram TF-IDF outperforms standard methods like BM25 and word TF-IDF for matching human commands to robotic actions. These findings highlight critical dependencies on data representation quality when building reliable instruction-following systems for robotics.
Sources coveringarXiv, AWS, Analytics Vidhya
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

Reference Wording Shapes Retrieval of Robot Task Instructions

arXiv2 min read

arXiv:2610.17549v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Identifying a robot task from a short instruction is sensitive to which descriptions are available for retrieval. We investigate this effect in the natural-language instructions included with the RLBench manipulation benchmark. We extract 296 fixed descriptions from 62 publicly available task files and compare five training-free lexical rankers over 80 random choices of one indexed description per task. Exact strings assigned to conflicting task labels are excluded from the primary score. Character n-gram TF-IDF achieves 61.3% mean top-1 accuracy on the resulting held-out instructions, compared with 55.6% for BM25 and 54.9% for word TF-IDF. Across gallery choices, character TF-IDF ranges from 55.2% to 66.8%; its 5th-95th percentile range is 56.9%-64.8%. Adding a second indexed description improves character TF-IDF by 7.0 percentage points on matched queries. These results quantify the influence of reference wording and representation choice on instruction-to-task retrieval under a consistent evaluation protocol.

Abstract:Identifying a robot task from a short instruction is sensitive to which descriptions are available for retrieval. We investigate this effect in the natural-language instructions included with the RLBench manipulation benchmark. We extract 296 fixed descriptions from 62 publicly available task files and compare five training-free lexical rankers over 80 random choices of one indexed description per task. Exact strings assigned to conflicting task labels are excluded from the primary score. Character n-gram TF-IDF achieves 61.3% mean top-1 accuracy on the resulting held-out instructions, compared with 55.6% for BM25 and 54.9% for word TF-IDF. Across gallery choices, character TF-IDF ranges from 55.2% to 66.8%; its 5th-95th percentile range is 56.9%-64.8%. Adding a second indexed description improves character TF-IDF by 7.0 percentage points on matched queries. These results quantify the influence of reference wording and representation choice on instruction-to-task retrieval under a consistent evaluation protocol.

Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Computation and Language (cs.CL); Information Retrieval (cs.IR); Robotics (cs.RO)

arXiv:2610.17549 [cs.AI]

(or arXiv:2610.17549v1 [cs.AI] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.17549 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 · 247 words

Related coverage