🤖 AI Summary
研究通过因果分析探讨了压缩VLA策略在闭环执行中失败的问题，并提出用替换部分训练数据的方法解决了该问题。
📝 Abstract
Compressed manipulation policies can pass offline evaluation while failing in closed-loop execution; this dissociation is established in prior work and is not our claim. We contribute a causal anatomy of one naturally occurring case. An 8-layer distillation of Octo-Base retains 86% of parameters, passes every offline check we applied (0.996 and 1.000 teacher-ratios on the family's own validation metrics), and collapses in closed loop: 0/72 vs. the teacher's 40/72 on a simulated WidowX pick-and-place task. The collapse is structured, not diffuse: early task stages degrade gradually (the student moves the object at 90% of the teacher's rate and grasps at 55%), while transport-to-target fails categorically, at 0% in every training variant. Paired action-trace forensics isolate the signature: a negative, late-heavy $z$ residual, roughly 10x its post-repair magnitude, and persistent across the base distillation and both continuation branches. Four standard therapies fail under matched controls: continued training and in-domain offline data leave success at zero, even though the latter measurably improves marginal action statistics; command-level compensation recovers nothing at any offset, although the same perturbations degrade healthy policies; clamping the symptom in the command channel preserves grasping, yet success stays at floor. A minimal-pair intervention that substitutes half of the training stream with deployment-distribution teacher rollouts, with every other setting held fixed, restores parity with the teacher (18/36 vs. 17/36 held-out), eliminates that signature, and recovers a teacher-like perturbation-response profile. We claim existence, not universality. Operationally, offline gates, including a family's own validation metrics, are insufficient acceptance tests for compressed policies; a few dozen closed-loop trials sufficed to find what they missed.