← 研踪 PaperTrailarXiv:2611.14488 · v1
Is Your Robot's Memory Just a Clock? Temporal Shortcuts in Memory-Augmented VLA Policies
首次提交 2026-11-11 02:47
版本更新 2026-11-11 02:47
雷达观测 2026-11-11 13:07
摘要
Memory-augmented vision-language-action (VLA) policies are meant to remember what happened. Many of them, however, fill memory by time: they sample frames uniformly across the episode and stamp each frame with its time step. Because time passes even when nothing happens, such a memory may not tell waiting from working. We show that it does not. On the counting tasks of RoboMME, we make the robot briefly pause or fidget its wrist. Such a null event changes nothing the task depends on, yet a released memory VLA counts the interval as work done and stops early. We call this failure phantom progress. It cuts success from 47 to 16 of 50 on one task and from 44 to 10 on the other. When the same frames are withheld from memory, success returns, so the cause lies in memory rather than in the interruption itself. We trace the failure to a temporal shortcut: because demonstrations proceed at a steady pace, elapsed time predicts progress. Indeed, rescaling the time stamps alone makes the policy stop early when the clock runs fast and repeat when it runs slow. Surprisingly, removing the time encoding does not cure the failure, because the frames of a null event still occupy slots of the time-sampled memory. Across RoboMME's released designs, vulnerability follows how memory is indexed. Of the fixes the diagnosis suggests, training with injected pauses does not remove the failure and impairs counting, whereas indexing memory by events recovers half or more of the loss without retraining. A memory meant to remember what happened should count events rather than clock ticks.
作者备注：38 pages
观测到的版本
相邻记录可能跳过中间版本；首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。
v1 · 2026-11-11 02:47 · 最新观测版本
Is Your Robot's Memory Just a Clock? Temporal Shortcuts in Memory-Augmented VLA Policies
Memory-augmented vision-language-action (VLA) policies are meant to remember what happened. Many of them, however, fill memory by time: they sample frames uniformly across the episode and stamp each frame with its time step. Because time passes even when nothing happens, such a memory may not tell waiting from working. We show that it does not. On the counting tasks of RoboMME, we make the robot briefly pause or fidget its wrist. Such a null event changes nothing the task depends on, yet a released memory VLA counts the interval as work done and stops early. We call this failure phantom progress. It cuts success from 47 to 16 of 50 on one task and from 44 to 10 on the other. When the same frames are withheld from memory, success returns, so the cause lies in memory rather than in the interruption itself. We trace the failure to a temporal shortcut: because demonstrations proceed at a steady pace, elapsed time predicts progress. Indeed, rescaling the time stamps alone makes the policy stop early when the clock runs fast and repeat when it runs slow. Surprisingly, removing the time encoding does not cure the failure, because the frames of a null event still occupy slots of the time-sampled memory. Across RoboMME's released designs, vulnerability follows how memory is indexed. Of the fixes the diagnosis suggests, training with injected pauses does not remove the failure and impairs counting, whereas indexing memory by events recovers half or more of the loss without retraining. A memory meant to remember what happened should count events rather than clock ticks.
查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗