analiza aiqbench
This research demonstrates that for fine-tuning Large Behavior Models in robotics, the choice of prior distribution (Gaussian vs. non-Gaussian) is largely irrelevant compared to encoder training dynamics. The study reveals that despite divergent embeddings, policies converge to similar action predictions regardless of the prior, suggesting current gains from optimized priors are limited to training-from-scratch scenarios. This finding provides a crucial efficiency signal for developers focusing on fine-tuning workflows where computational resources should prioritize encoder updates over prior engineering.
The Gaussian Is Enough: Flow-Matching Priors Do Not Help When Fine-Tuning Large Behavior Models
arXiv:2609.27070v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Modern robot imitation learning increasingly relies on generative policies based on diffusion or flow-matching models, which generate actions by transforming samples from a prior distribution. A key question is whether the choice of prior matters. Replacing the standard Gaussian with a closer-to-target, non-Gaussian prior has been shown to substantially improve performance when training from scratch. A natural next step is to ask whether these gains transfer to fine-tuning pretrained Large Behavior Models (LBMs) such as LBM 1.0, $\pi_{0.5}$, and GR00T~N1.5, where one might expect even larger gains. Surprisingly, we find that this is not the case, except possibly at very low fine-tuning data fractions. Across over 100K simulation rollouts spanning all three aforementioned LBMs on 40+ tasks in two simulation platforms, and 1250 hardware rollouts on five bimanual manipulation tasks, non-Gaussian priors that are demonstrably closer to the target yield statistically indistinguishable or worse fine-tuning performance than a standard Gaussian prior. Diagnostic analyses suggest why: fine-tuned imitation learning policies converge to similar action predictions across priors, despite their fine-tuned encoder embeddings diverging substantially from the pretrained embeddings and each other. A learning-rate ablation further confirms that encoder training is the dominant factor in fine-tuning performance, substantially outweighing the effect of prior choice. We conclude with concrete directions for future research on when and why learned priors might still matter in fine-tuning. Project page: https://cxu-tri.github.io/non_gaussian_FT/
Abstract:Modern robot imitation learning increasingly relies on generative policies based on diffusion or flow-matching models, which generate actions by transforming samples from a prior distribution. A key question is whether the choice of prior matters. Replacing the standard Gaussian with a closer-to-target, non-Gaussian prior has been shown to substantially improve performance when training from scratch. A natural next step is to ask whether these gains transfer to fine-tuning pretrained Large Behavior Models (LBMs) such as LBM 1.0, $\pi_{0.5}$, and GR00T~N1.5, where one might expect even larger gains. Surprisingly, we find that this is not the case, except possibly at very low fine-tuning data fractions. Across over 100K simulation rollouts spanning all three aforementioned LBMs on 40+ tasks in two simulation platforms, and 1250 hardware rollouts on five bimanual manipulation tasks, non-Gaussian priors that are demonstrably closer to the target yield statistically indistinguishable or worse fine-tuning performance than a standard Gaussian prior. Diagnostic analyses suggest why: fine-tuned imitation learning policies converge to similar action predictions across priors, despite their fine-tuned encoder embeddings diverging substantially from the pretrained embeddings and each other. A learning-rate ablation further confirms that encoder training is the dominant factor in fine-tuning performance, substantially outweighing the effect of prior choice. We conclude with concrete directions for future research on when and why learned priors might still matter in fine-tuning. Project page: this https URL
Robotics (cs.RO); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
arXiv:2609.27070 [cs.RO]
(or arXiv:2609.27070v1 [cs.RO] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.27070 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.
Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 322 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe
Dyna-2: General Purpose Physical Agents with Hour-Long Autonomy — Jason Ma, Dyna Robotics
Latent Space · 13 oct. 2026

[AINews] Meta Muse Wonder & Wonder Full: MSL’s Claude 5.5-tier Frontier Model
Latent Space · 13 oct. 2026
A Mike's-Eye View of ARC's Research
AI Alignment Forum · 9 iun. 2026

Bluesky’s new CEO wants a big tent, not a bubble
The Verge · 3 aug. 2026