RoboCasa-Shift: Stage-Aware Robustness Evaluation of Vision-Language-Action Policies in Long-Horizon Household Manipulation
Abstract
Domain fit: AI-adjacent · Paper appears method- or tooling-adjacent to AI workflows with partial ecosystem coverage.
Vision-language-action (VLA) robustness is commonly summarized by aggregate task success, which obscures how individual executions change under distribution shifts and where failures emerge in long-horizon tasks. We introduce \textbf{RoboCasa-Shift}, a diagnostic robustness benchmark built on RoboCasa365 that combines controlled single-factor shifts, matched clean-perturbed rollouts in which each pair shares the same underlying settings and differs only in the target shift, and simulator-grounded stage-aware diagnostics. We evaluate GR00T N1.5 on four long-horizon tasks that pass a predefined clean-performance gate under four perturbation factors and three calibrated severity levels, including conditions that drive the evaluated policy to complete task failure, totaling 1,040 formal rollouts. Robustness responses vary substantially across factors and tasks, and increasing severity does not always produce monotonic degradation. For example, one camera condition yields $Δ\mathrm{SR}=0$ despite 8 of 80 matched episodes changing outcome. Stage-aware analysis further shows that the same end-to-end degradation can correspond to different execution-depth profiles. Camera $L_2$ and Gaussian blur $L_1$ both yield $Δ\mathrm{SR}=0.188$, yet their first-stage failure rates are 19.0\% and 36.4\%, respectively. Our findings suggest that VLA robustness should be viewed as a multi-dimensional property of execution rather than a single end-to-end performance measure, motivating evaluation protocols that jointly capture outcome degradation, paired outcome sensitivity, and failure progression. The code is publicly available at https://github.com/HaochengWang23/RoboCasa-Shift.
Results and benchmarks
Vision-language-action (VLA) robustness is commonly summarized by aggregate task success, which obscures how individual executions change under distribution shifts and where failures emerge in long-horizon tasks.
Benchmark evidence is limited
Evidence graph: 2 refs, 1 links.
Utility signals: depth 60/100, grounding 58/100, status medium.
Implementation
No direct implementation yet
Maintained implementation evidence is not confirmed for this paper yet.
Use the implementation status and reproduction sections for the current action plan.
No verified maintained repo yet
There is no verified maintained implementation yet. Use this baseline plan to decide whether to prototype now or defer.
- No direct maintained implementation was found. Use the paper PDF and citation graph to design a baseline reproduction.
- Track assumptions and missing details in an experiment log before coding.
Time to first repro: a few days
Recommendation evidence is currently too limited for a maintained-repo choice. Use Implementation Status and Reproduction Path for a practical baseline plan.
- Estimate is based on paper-only reproduction flow
Compare implementation paths
Compare maintenance quality, reproducibility coverage, and evidence confidence before choosing a reproduction baseline.
- Maintenance
- Active
- Confidence
- Low
- Reproducibility
- Strong
- Stars
- 0
- Last push
- Oct 22, 2026 (3d)
Matched via arXiv identifier search
- No tagged releases
- No Docker setup
- Low confidence match
- Maintenance
- Active
- Confidence
- Low
- Reproducibility
- Moderate
- Stars
- 0
- Last push
- Oct 12, 2026 (13d)
Matched via arXiv identifier search
- No tagged releases
- No Docker setup
- Low confidence match
Reproduction readiness
No repo
No verified implementation available
- No maintained repository has been identified for this paper. Check adjacent implementations or HF artifacts below.
Hardware requirements
- Expect multi-day setup/compute for meaningful reproduction based on current guidance.
Validation caveat
Repositories and ecosystem
No additional verified repositories beyond the primary recommendation.
These repositories had low-confidence matching signals and are hidden by default.
- HaochengWang23/RoboCasa-Shift
Confidence: Low · 0 stars
- eerstar/LLM-Agent-paper-daily
Confidence: Low · 0 stars
Hugging Face artifacts
No trustworthy direct or curated related Hugging Face artifacts were found yet. Use targeted searches to quickly locate candidate models, datasets, and demos.
Datasets
Tip: start with models, then check datasets and spaces if you need evaluation data or demos.
Research context
Tasks
None detected
Methods
Transformer
Domains
Computer vision
Open this paper in HFEPX to review benchmark signals, evaluation modes, and human-feedback protocol context.
Open in HFEPXJump to Paper2Code search queries derived from this paper's research context.