$τ_0$-VLA: a Hierarchical Robot Foundation Model with World-Model-Guided Test-Time Computation
Open accessAbstract
Long-horizon robot manipulation requires a robot to both execute individual skills reliably and sequence them coherently over extended tasks. Most hierarchical vision-language-action (VLA) models make each such decision with a single forward pass, leaving no mechanism to allocate additional computation to difficult or consequential choices. We introduce $τ_0$-VLA, a hierarchical robot foundation model that formulates high-level subtask generation as a compute-scalable inference problem through world-model-guided test-time computation. At each inference step, the high-level policy uses execution memory to generate a subtask and, when needed, searches over alternatives before committing to its output. A low-level policy then executes the generated subtask across multiple robot embodiments. The policy is trained on 40,115 hours of heterogeneous real-world data with multimodal co-training. Across in-domain and distribution-shifted settings, allocating additional test-time computation substantially improves next-subtask prediction accuracy, and these gains translate into higher closed-loop success on long-horizon robot manipulation tasks.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
FAST: Efficient Action Tokenization for Vision-Language-Action Models
Pertsch, K., Stachowicz, K., Ichter, B., Driess, D., Nair, S., Vuong, Q., Mees, O., Finn, C., & Levine, S. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2501.09747 · Cited by 73 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Complementary work studies compact policies, efficient action tok-enization, knowledge-preserving training, and asynchronous action-chunk execution [37, 33, 11, 5].”
Flagged first, then by citations
- Authors
- Cai, X., Cai, Y., Chen, B., Chen, J., Chen, Z., Feng, S., Hou, T., Huang, J., Jiang, H., Ju, R., Li, D., Li, M., Li, S., Li, X., Li, Y., Liu, Y., Liu, Z., Luo, J., Miao, J., Ni, R., Nie, B., Pan, M., Ren, X., Song, J., Wang, J., Wang, P., Wang, S., Wang, X., Wei, D., Wu, D., Xie, P., Yang, P., Ye, H., Yue, X., Zhang, J., Zhang, Q., Zhao, X., Zhou, P., & Zhou, Y.
- Affiliations
- Shanghai Innovation Institute (CN)
- Chinese University of Hong Kong (HK)
- ORCID
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2026
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2608.16885
- OpenAlex
- W7203682176
- Cited by
- 0
- References
- 1
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- 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 › Artificial Intelligence › AI-based Problem Solving and Planning
- Keywords
- vision-language-action models, world models, distribution shift, robot embodiment
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