Do What? Teaching Vision-Language-Action Models to Reject the Impossible

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2508.16292v1
• Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2025 10:54:33 GMT
• Title: Do What? Teaching Vision-Language-Action Models to Reject the Impossible
• Authors: Wen-Han Hsieh, Elvis Hsieh, Dantong Niu, Trevor Darrell, Roei Herzig, David M. Chan,
• Abstract summary: Vision-Language-Action (VLA) models have demonstrated strong performance on a range of robotic tasks.<n>We propose Instruct-Verify-and-Act (IVA), a framework that detects when an instruction cannot be executed due to a false premise.<n>Our experiments show that IVA improves false premise detection accuracy by 97.56% over baselines.
• Score: 53.40183895299108
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: Recently, Vision-Language-Action (VLA) models have demonstrated strong performance on a range of robotic tasks. These models rely on multimodal inputs, with language instructions playing a crucial role -- not only in predicting actions, but also in robustly interpreting user intent, even when the requests are impossible to fulfill. In this work, we investigate how VLAs can recognize, interpret, and respond to false-premise instructions: natural language commands that reference objects or conditions absent from the environment. We propose Instruct-Verify-and-Act (IVA), a unified framework that (i) detects when an instruction cannot be executed due to a false premise, (ii) engages in language-based clarification or correction, and (iii) grounds plausible alternatives in perception and action. Towards this end, we construct a large-scale instruction tuning setup with structured language prompts and train a VLA model capable of handling both accurate and erroneous requests. Our approach leverages a contextually augmented, semi-synthetic dataset containing paired positive and false-premise instructions, enabling robust detection and natural language correction. Our experiments show that IVA improves false premise detection accuracy by 97.56% over baselines, while increasing successful responses in false-premise scenarios by 50.78%.

Related papers

• Act, Think or Abstain: Complexity-Aware Adaptive Inference for Vision-Language-Action Models [7.802379200026965]
  We propose an adaptive framework that dynamically routes VLA execution based on the complexity of the perceived state.<n>Our approach transforms the VLA's vision-language backbone into an active detection tool by projecting latent embeddings into an ensemble of parametric and non-parametric estimators.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-05T13:14:41Z)
• When Vision Overrides Language: Evaluating and Mitigating Counterfactual Failures in VLAs [31.92520697946991]
  Vision-Language-Action models (VLAs) promise to ground language instructions in robot control, yet in practice often fail to faithfully follow language.<n>We show that counterfactual failures are prevalent yet underexplored across state-of-the-art VLAs.<n>We propose Counterfactual Action Guidance (CAG), a simple yet effective dual-branch inference scheme.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-19T18:59:20Z)
• Scaling Verification Can Be More Effective than Scaling Policy Learning for Vision-Language-Action Alignment [58.93227458806748]
  CoVer-VLA is a hierarchical test-time verification pipeline using the trained verifier.<n>Our framework precomputes a diverse set of rephrased instructions from a Vision-Language-Model.<n>It repeatedly generates action candidates for each instruction, and then uses the verifier to select the optimal high-level prompt and low-level action chunks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-12T18:59:59Z)
• LangForce: Bayesian Decomposition of Vision Language Action Models via Latent Action Queries [30.732526921367835]
  LangForce is a novel framework that enforces instruction following via Bayesian decomposition.<n>We show that LangForce significantly improves generalization without requiring new data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-21T17:15:22Z)
• VIRO: Robust and Efficient Neuro-Symbolic Reasoning with Verification for Referring Expression Comprehension [51.76841625486355]
  Referring Expression (REC) aims to localize the image region corresponding to a natural-language query.<n>Recent neuro-symbolic REC approaches leverage large language models (LLMs) and vision-language models (VLMs) to perform compositional reasoning.<n>We introduce VIRO, a neuro-symbolic framework that embeds lightweight operator-level verifiers within reasoning steps.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-19T07:21:19Z)
• Seeing to Act, Prompting to Specify: A Bayesian Factorization of Vision Language Action Policy [59.44168425139687]
  BayesVLA is a Bayesian factorization that decomposes the policy into a visual-action prior, supporting seeing-to-act, and a language-conditioned likelihood, enabling prompt-to-specify.<n>Experiments show superior generalization to unseen instructions, objects, and environments compared to existing methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-12T01:59:23Z)
• Do What You Say: Steering Vision-Language-Action Models via Runtime Reasoning-Action Alignment Verification [17.948161564138033]
  Reasoning Vision Language Action (VLA) models improve robotic instruction-following by generating step-by-step textual plans before low-level actions.<n>But even with a correct textual plan, the generated actions can still miss the intended outcomes in the plan, especially in out-of-distribution scenarios.<n>We formalize this phenomenon as a lack of embodied CoT faithfulness, and introduce a training-free, runtime policy steering method for reasoning-action alignment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-18T00:38:45Z)
• FOSSIL: Harnessing Feedback on Suboptimal Samples for Data-Efficient Generalisation with Imitation Learning for Embodied Vision-and-Language Tasks [45.65159253753118]
  This work explores how agents trained with imitation learning can learn robust representations from both optimal and suboptimal demonstrations.<n>We provide language feedback embeddings as part of the input sequence into a Transformer-based policy.<n>We test our approach on a range of embodied Vision-and-Language tasks in our custom BabyAI-XGen environment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-13T11:55:21Z)
• On the Loss of Context-awareness in General Instruction Fine-tuning [101.03941308894191]
  We investigate the loss of context awareness after supervised fine-tuning.<n>We find that the performance decline is associated with a bias toward different roles learned during conversational instruction fine-tuning.<n>We propose a metric to identify context-dependent examples from general instruction fine-tuning datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-05T00:16:01Z)
• Improving Instruction Following in Language Models through Proxy-Based Uncertainty Estimation [12.921225188504643]
  We propose a novel Uncertainty-aware Reward Model (URM) that introduces a robust uncertainty estimation for the quality of paired responses.<n> Empirical results demonstrate significant benefits of incorporating the proposed proxy into language model training.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-10T12:14:11Z)
• Instruction Position Matters in Sequence Generation with Large Language Models [67.87516654892343]
  Large language models (LLMs) are capable of performing conditional sequence generation tasks, such as translation or summarization. We propose enhancing the instruction-following capability of LLMs by shifting the position of task instructions after the input sentences.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-23T12:36:57Z)
• Evaluating the Instruction-Following Robustness of Large Language Models to Prompt Injection [70.28425745910711]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated exceptional proficiency in instruction-following. This capability brings with it the risk of prompt injection attacks. We evaluate the robustness of instruction-following LLMs against such attacks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-17T06:21:50Z)
• Interpretable Unified Language Checking [42.816372695828306]
  We present an interpretable, unified, language checking (UniLC) method for both human and machine-generated language. We find that LLMs can achieve high performance on a combination of fact-checking, stereotype detection, and hate speech detection tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-07T16:47:49Z)
• Language Models Are Poor Learners of Directional Inference [17.807086499130488]
  LMs show limited ability to learn such directional inference. Existing datasets fail to test directionality. Existing LM-prompting models are incompetent directional entailment learners.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-10T13:43:16Z)
• Pre-Trained Language Models for Interactive Decision-Making [72.77825666035203]
  We describe a framework for imitation learning in which goals and observations are represented as a sequence of embeddings. We demonstrate that this framework enables effective generalization across different environments. For test tasks involving novel goals or novel scenes, initializing policies with language models improves task completion rates by 43.6%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-02-03T18:55:52Z)
• Language Models as Zero-Shot Planners: Extracting Actionable Knowledge for Embodied Agents [111.33545170562337]
  We investigate the possibility of grounding high-level tasks, expressed in natural language, to a chosen set of actionable steps. We find that if pre-trained LMs are large enough and prompted appropriately, they can effectively decompose high-level tasks into low-level plans. We propose a procedure that conditions on existing demonstrations and semantically translates the plans to admissible actions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-01-18T18:59:45Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.