Self-Supervised Bootstrapping of Action-Predictive Embodied Reasoning

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2602.08167v1
• Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2026 00:10:17 GMT
• Title: Self-Supervised Bootstrapping of Action-Predictive Embodied Reasoning
• Authors: Milan Ganai, Katie Luo, Jonas Frey, Clark Barrett, Marco Pavone,
• Abstract summary: Embodied Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning has significantly enhanced Vision-Language-Action (VLA) models.<n>Current methods rely on rigid templates to specify reasoning primitives.<n>We introduce R&B-EnCoRe, which enables models to bootstrap embodied reasoning from internet-scale knowledge.
• Score: 22.45731787625021
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Embodied Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning has significantly enhanced Vision-Language-Action (VLA) models, yet current methods rely on rigid templates to specify reasoning primitives (e.g., objects in the scene, high-level plans, structural affordances). These templates can force policies to process irrelevant information that distracts from critical action-prediction signals. This creates a bottleneck: without successful policies, we cannot verify reasoning quality; without quality reasoning, we cannot build robust policies. We introduce R&B-EnCoRe, which enables models to bootstrap embodied reasoning from internet-scale knowledge through self-supervised refinement. By treating reasoning as a latent variable within importance-weighted variational inference, models can generate and distill a refined reasoning training dataset of embodiment-specific strategies without external rewards, verifiers, or human annotation. We validate R&B-EnCoRe across manipulation (Franka Panda in simulation, WidowX in hardware), legged navigation (bipedal, wheeled, bicycle, quadruped), and autonomous driving embodiments using various VLA architectures with 1B, 4B, 7B, and 30B parameters. Our approach achieves 28% gains in manipulation success, 101% improvement in navigation scores, and 21% reduction in collision-rate metric over models that indiscriminately reason about all available primitives. R&B-EnCoRe enables models to distill reasoning that is predictive of successful control, bypassing manual annotation engineering while grounding internet-scale knowledge in physical execution.

Related papers

• Controllable Reasoning Models Are Private Thinkers [74.40231123523115]
  We propose training models to follow instructions not only in the final answer, but also in reasoning traces.<n>We fine-tune models on an instruction-following dataset with explicit restrictions on reasoning traces.<n>Our results show that improving instruction-following behavior in reasoning models can significantly enhance privacy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-27T17:39:10Z)
• Native Reasoning Models: Training Language Models to Reason on Unverifiable Data [16.065264121785294]
  We introduce NRT (Native Reasoning Training), a novel framework that cultivates complex reasoning.<n>NRT reframes the training problem by treating the reasoning process as a latent variable.<n>NRT achieves state-of-the-art performance among verifier-free methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-12T04:15:46Z)
• From Passive Metric to Active Signal: The Evolving Role of Uncertainty Quantification in Large Language Models [77.04403907729738]
  This survey charts the evolution of uncertainty from a passive diagnostic metric to an active control signal guiding real-time model behavior.<n>We demonstrate how uncertainty is leveraged as an active control signal across three frontiers.<n>This survey argues that mastering the new trend of uncertainty is essential for building the next generation of scalable, reliable, and trustworthy AI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-22T06:21:31Z)
• You Need Reasoning to Learn Reasoning: The Limitations of Label-Free RL in Weak Base Models [12.14455026524814]
  We investigate the generalizability of label-free RL approaches to base models with limited reasoning capabilities.<n>We find that label-free RL is highly dependent on the base model's pre-existing reasoning capability.<n>We propose a simple yet effective method for label-free RL that utilizes curriculum learning to progressively introduce harder problems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-07T01:05:11Z)
• KAT-V1: Kwai-AutoThink Technical Report [50.84483585850113]
  We present Kwaipilot-AutoThink (KAT), an open-source 40B large language model developed to address the overthinking problem in reasoning-intensive tasks.<n>KAT dynamically switches between reasoning and non-reasoning modes based on task complexity.<n>We also propose Step-SRPO, a reinforcement learning algorithm that incorporates intermediate supervision into the GRPO framework.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-11T04:07:10Z)
• Beyond Templates: Dynamic Adaptation of Reasoning Demonstrations via Feasibility-Aware Exploration [15.711365331854614]
  We introduce Dynamic Adaptation of Reasoning Trajectories (DART), a novel data adaptation framework.<n>Instead of uniformly imitating expert steps, DART employs a selective imitation strategy guided by step-wise adaptability estimation.<n>We validate DART across multiple reasoning benchmarks and model scales, demonstrating that it significantly improves generalization and data efficiency.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-27T04:08:11Z)
• Let LRMs Break Free from Overthinking via Self-Braking Tuning [68.93713497579853]
  Large reasoning models (LRMs) have significantly enhanced their reasoning capabilities by generating longer chains of thought.<n>This performance gain comes at the cost of a substantial increase in redundant reasoning during the generation process.<n>We propose a novel framework, Self-Braking Tuning (SBT), which tackles overthinking from the perspective of allowing the model to regulate its own reasoning process.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-20T16:53:40Z)
• Beyond 'Aha!': Toward Systematic Meta-Abilities Alignment in Large Reasoning Models [86.88657425848547]
  Large reasoning models (LRMs) already possess a latent capacity for long chain-of-thought reasoning.<n>We explicitly align models with three meta-abilities: deduction, induction, and abduction, using automatically generated, self-verifiable tasks.<n>Our three stage-pipeline individual alignment, parameter-space merging, and domain-specific reinforcement learning, boosts performance by over 10% relative to instruction-tuned baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-15T17:58:33Z)
• The CoT Encyclopedia: Analyzing, Predicting, and Controlling how a Reasoning Model will Think [81.38614558541772]
  We introduce the CoT Encyclopedia, a framework for analyzing and steering model reasoning.<n>Our method automatically extracts diverse reasoning criteria from model-generated CoTs.<n>We show that this framework produces more interpretable and comprehensive analyses than existing methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-15T11:31:02Z)
• The Elicitation Game: Evaluating Capability Elicitation Techniques [1.004239817159128]
  We evaluate the effectiveness of capability elicitation techniques by intentionally training model organisms.<n>We introduce a novel method for training model organisms, based on circuit-breaking.<n>For a code-generation task, only fine-tuning can elicit the hidden capabilities of our novel model organism.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-04T09:54:24Z)
• Wait, that's not an option: LLMs Robustness with Incorrect Multiple-Choice Options [2.1184929769291294]
  This work introduces a novel framework for evaluating LLMs' capacity to balance instruction-following with critical reasoning.<n>We show that post-training aligned models often default to selecting invalid options, while base models exhibit improved refusal capabilities that scale with model size.<n>We additionally conduct a parallel human study showing similar instruction-following biases, with implications for how these biases may propagate through human feedback datasets used in alignment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-27T19:27:43Z)

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.