arXiv ScienceSearch

arXiv · 2608.23629

Macro-Operator Generation and Predicate Selection for TAMP Operator Learning

Abstract

Creating symbolic operators by hand is one of the main bottlenecks in deploying Task and Motion Planning systems (TAMP). Recent works show that these operators can instead be learned directly from demonstration data. Existing methods, however, typically learn each action in isolation and cannot capture the recurring multi-step structure of manipulation tasks, so the search becomes intractable on long sequential tasks. A further inefficiency arises in the symbolic state: every provided predicate is evaluated at every search node, even when it never appears in any learned operator. We present a system that addresses both problems together. Its central component is the automatic generation of macro-operators, composite actions that compress a recurring sequence of individual actions into a single planning step. Our system discovers causally linked action pairs directly from the training data, where one action produces exactly the condition that the next one requires, and turns each pair into a new operator. Alongside this, our system prunes every predicate that no learned operator references, which shrinks the symbolic state evaluated at each search node. Together, these changes shorten the effective planning horizon, and the benefit they bring grows with the length of the task. Across four TAMP domains, our method reaches up to a 4.6x planning speedup compared to the baseline method, namely Learning Operators for TAMP. More importantly, it solves a long sequential task that the baseline cannot solve. Macro-operator discovery thus not only accelerates planning but, in certain domains, determines solvability in practice.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Can Emir Bora, Emre Ugur. 2026-08-23. Macro-Operator Generation and Predicate Selection for TAMP Operator Learning. https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.23629

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

Discover connections

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

IMLE-VLA: Fast Single-Step Action Generation for Vision-Language-Action Policies

Vision-language-action (VLA) policies leverage pretrained vision-language backbones to achieve strong cross-task generalization. A leading design couples this backbone with a dedicated continuous action head trained via diffusion or flow matching. However, such heads rely on iterative multi-step sampling, for example 10 Euler steps in $\pi_{0.5}$. This creates an inference bottleneck that produces stop-and-go movement in the robot and slower task completion. We introduce IMLE-VLA, which replaces the iterative action head with a single-step conditional generator trained via conditional Implicit Maximum Likelihood Estimation (cIMLE). The cIMLE objective promotes multimodal action coverage, avoiding the mode collapse of naive regression heads while eliminating multi-step sampling entirely. When IMLE-VLA is applied to $\pi_{0.5}$, it increases inference frequency 3.67x (55 Hz vs. 15 Hz), enabling up to 11x higher action throughput. On the 40-task LIBERO benchmark, IMLE-VLA achieves the highest average success rate (98.0%) among all baselines while leading in inference frequency. Under the test-time perturbations of LIBERO-plus, IMLE-VLA retains $\pi_{0.5}$'s robustness while other baselines degrade sharply, confirming that the cIMLE head preserves generalization. Real-world experiments on a Franka Emika Panda across four tasks demonstrate smoother motion (2.2x to 3.0x lower jerk) and faster task completion, with IMLE-VLA outperforming $\pi_{0.5}$ on every task and reducing average VLA inference time per episode by 3.9x to 6.6x. Videos and code are available at https://kianhk6.github.io/IMLE-VLA/

cs.RO

ObstaDiff: Generalizable Diffusion Policy Learning via Obstacle-aware Representations

Imitation learning has achieved impressive results in robotic manipulation, yet most existing approaches assume clean backgrounds and lack explicit mechanisms for obstacle-aware motion generation. Extending such policies to cluttered, real-world scenes with unstructured obstacles remains a key generalization challenge. We present ObstaDiff, a decomposed diffusion-policy framework with a lightweight obstacle-aware visual encoder. ObstaDiff extracts a structured target-obstacle-background representation, enabling the downstream alignment policy to generate end-effector trajectories toward a target-centered bottleneck pose while reasoning about surrounding obstacles. We evaluate ObstaDiff on 61 real-robot greenhouse trials per method (366 executions in total). ObstaDiff achieves 75.41% average task success and 8.20% average obstacle collision rate, outperforming representative imitation-learning baselines and improving generalization in cluttered agricultural scenes.

cs.RO

Testing Between the Test Cases: Proving End-to-End Steering in Conditions You Never Drove

AI-based automated vehicle testing is challenging because a model that passes every test condition can still fail in the real world. Formal verification offers a way to directly address this gap. On a simulated highway and an arterial road we trained two small end-to-end steering networks each in CARLA, one on clear conditions alone and one on clear, fog, night and low sun. All four models were driven against a 2.19 ft lane-departure budget. Without driving again, we used bound propagation, a formal method that reads the trained weights, to compute how far steering can drift at every disturbance strength between two captured images. One calculation covers more than a campaign could drive: on the arterial it spans 133 poses, where ten intensities each would be 10^133 combinations, in minutes on one GPU. Not only did formal verification find conditions that broke the clear-trained policy without simulation testing, it provided some preliminary evidence for potential failures between the test cases. Our overall conclusion is that formal verification is a viable complement to simulation, and could be adopted as a part of verification and validation for automated driving.

cs.RO