Skip to content

Estimate, Don't Imitate: Reusing Differentiable State-Based Policies for Visuomotor Control

Sep 2026 · 0 citations · 35 references
Computer Science

TL;DR

A visual state estimator is trained using both direct state supervision and an action-consistency loss backpropagated through the frozen, differentiable expert, which consistently outperforms direct pixel-to-action imitation from the same expert demonstration corpus.

Abstract

Simulation-trained manipulation policies can exploit privileged state information to learn effective contact-rich behaviours, but deployment requires acting from partial observations such as noisy camera images. A common solution is teacher-student distillation, in which a visuomotor policy is trained to reproduce the actions of the privileged expert. This requires the student to jointly infer the task-relevant state and relearn the expert's action mapping that is already available. An alternative is to reuse the state-based expert and learn only a perceptual interface that reconstructs its missing state inputs. However, minimising the state estimate error alone does not necessarily minimise the downstream control error induced by these estimates. To bridge this gap, we train a visual state estimator using both direct state supervision and an action-consistency loss backpropagated through the frozen, differentiable expert. A scheduled objective first establishes a physically meaningful state estimate and progressively emphasises errors that affect the expert's actions. Across five goal-conditioned manipulation tasks, retaining the expert consistently outperforms direct pixel-to-action imitation from the same expert demonstration corpus. We further demonstrate sim-to-real transfer on a physical Panda robot, achieving 76% success without retraining the underlying expert.

View source

Similar papers

#machine learning Review Open access Oct 2014

Software development in startup companies: A systematic mapping study

The results indicate that software engineering work practices are chosen opportunistically, adapted and configured to provide value under the constrains imposed by the startup context.

Nicolò Paternoster, Carmine Giardino, M. Unterkalmsteiner et al. · 394 citations · ⚡54

Diffusion models as plug-and-play priors

The possibility of inferring high-dimensional data inference in a model that consists of a prior and an auxiliary differentiable constraint given some additional information is considered, thereby allowing a range of potential applications in adapting models to new domains and tasks.

Alexandros Graikos, Esmeralda S. Whitammer, N. Jojic et al. · 316 citations · ⚡15

Trajectory Balance: Improved Credit Assignment in GFlowNets

It is proved that any global minimizer of the trajectory balance objective can define a policy that samples exactly from the target distribution, and empirically demonstrate the benefits of the trajectories balance objective for GFlowNet convergence, diversity of generated samples, and robustness to long action sequenc...

Esmeralda S. Whitammer, Moksh Jain, Emmanuel Bengio et al. · 302 citations · ⚡60

KTO: Model Alignment as Prospect Theoretic Optimization

This work proposes a HALO that directly maximizes the utility of generations instead of maximizing the log-likelihood of preferences, and suggests that the best loss depends on the inductive biases most appropriate for a given setting, an oft-overlooked consideration.

Kawin Ethayarajh, Winnie Xu, Niklas Muennighoff et al. · 195 citations · ⚡28
#machine learning Review Open access Jun 2014

Why Early-Stage Software Startups Fail: A Behavioral Framework

This state-of-practice investigation was performed using a literature review followed by a multiple-case study approach and presents how inconsistency between managerial strategies and execution can lead to failure by means of a behavioral framework.

Carmine Giardino, Xiaofeng Wang, P. Abrahamsson · 175 citations · ⚡19

Related blog posts

MIT News · Artificial Intelligence Oct 23, 2026

Q&A: How AI came to model the “messy” human mind

Assistant Professor Benjamin Lindquist studies how engineers deliberately injected randomness into early AI, giving rise to deep-learning models that sometimes hallucinate.

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.