PreprintCited by 2Robot Manipulation and LearningReinforcement Learning in RoboticsMultimodal Machine Learning Applications

RADAR: Benchmarking Vision-Language-Action Generalization via Real-World Dynamics, Spatial-Physical Intelligence, and Autonomous Evaluation

Open access
Chen, Yuhao, Zhan, Zhihao, Lin, Xiaoxin, Song, Zijian, Liu, Hao, Lyu, Qinhan, Zu, Yubo, Chen, Xiao +6 more·2026·arXiv

Abstract

VLA models have achieved remarkable progress in embodied intelligence; however, their evaluation remains largely confined to simulations or highly constrained real-world settings. This mismatch creates a substantial reality gap, where strong benchmark performance often masks poor generalization in diverse physical environments. We identify three systemic shortcomings in current benchmarking practices that hinder fair and reliable model comparison. (1) Existing benchmarks fail to model real-world dynamics, overlooking critical factors such as dynamic object configurations, robot initial states, lighting changes, and sensor noise. (2) Current protocols neglect spatial--physical intelligence, reducing evaluation to rote manipulation tasks that do not probe geometric reasoning. (3) The field lacks scalable fully autonomous evaluation, instead relying on simplistic 2D metrics that miss 3D spatial structure or on human-in-the-loop systems that are costly, biased, and unscalable. To address these limitations, we introduce RADAR (Real-world Autonomous Dynamics And Reasoning), a benchmark designed to systematically evaluate VLA generalization under realistic conditions. RADAR integrates three core components: (1) a principled suite of physical dynamics; (2) dedicated tasks that explicitly test spatial reasoning and physical understanding; and (3) a fully autonomous evaluation pipeline based on 3D metrics, eliminating the need for human supervision. We apply RADAR to audit multiple state-of-the-art VLA models and uncover severe fragility beneath their apparent competence. Performance drops precipitously under modest physical dynamics, with the expectation of 3D IoU declining from 0.261 to 0.068 under sensor noise. Moreover, models exhibit limited spatial reasoning capability. These findings position RADAR as a necessary bench toward reliable and generalizable real-world evaluation of VLA models.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2602.10980

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Authors
Chen, Y., Zhan, Z., Lin, X., Song, Z., Liu, H., Lyu, Q., Zu, Y., Chen, X., Liu, Z., Pu, T., Chen, T., Wang, K., Lin, L., & Wang, G.
Affiliations
  • Sun Yat-sen University (CN)
  • Guangdong University of Technology (CN)
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2026
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W7128682635
Cited by
2
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 2
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Control and Systems Engineering › Robot Manipulation and Learning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Reinforcement Learning in Robotics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Multimodal Machine Learning Applications
Keywords
vision-language-action models, benchmarking, generalization, embodied AI, robotic manipulation, physical dynamics, spatial reasoning, reality gap, sensor noise

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review