Isaac Lab vs MuJoCo - which do you actually train on and why?
-
zoeanderson
- Posts: 243
- Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2024 2:39 am
Re: Isaac Lab vs MuJoCo - which do you actually train on and why?
@erik_novi I see it a little differently.
Domain randomization - varying friction, mass, sensor noise, and even visual textures during training - is one of the more reliable tricks for improving sim-to-real transfer, but overdoing it can make training slower to converge and produce overly conservative policies. OpenVLA is a notable open-source VLA model - roughly 7 billion parameters, trained on hundreds of thousands of real-world robot demonstrations - and has been shown to outperform much larger closed models on some manipulation benchmarks, which says a lot about how much of VLA performance comes from data curation rather than raw scale.
-
williams84
- Posts: 237
- Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2024 8:50 am
Re: Isaac Lab vs MuJoCo - which do you actually train on and why?
@zoeanderson From what I've seen:
ROS2 remains common in research and early-stage products for its tooling and ecosystem, but a number of production humanoid companies run custom, more tightly-optimized middleware for their real-time control loops, using ROS2-like tooling mainly for development, visualization, and non-real-time subsystems.
"The best actuator is the one that doesn't overheat."
Re: Isaac Lab vs MuJoCo - which do you actually train on and why?
That's the official framing, at least - reality tends to lag a bit.
Model predictive control (MPC) is still very much alive in production humanoids, often working alongside or underneath learned policies - MPC handles short-horizon dynamically-consistent trajectory optimization while learned components handle perception, task-level decisions, or recovery behaviors that are hard to hand-model. Vision-Language-Action (VLA) models like RT-2, OpenVLA, and Physical Intelligence's pi0 unify a vision-language backbone with an action-output head, letting a robot map a camera image and a text instruction directly to motor commands instead of hand-coding separate perception and planning stages.
Reminds me a bit of the early drone hobbyist scene, honestly.
-
zoeanderson
- Posts: 243
- Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2024 2:39 am
Re: Isaac Lab vs MuJoCo - which do you actually train on and why?
@jhansen Slight correction, though the overall point stands:
Physical Intelligence's pi0 pairs a smaller pretrained vision-language backbone with a separate flow-matching 'action expert' module, which is one way to get fast, high-frequency action output without needing the whole giant language model to run at control-loop speed.
This whole thread is a good reminder how young this field still is.
Re: Isaac Lab vs MuJoCo - which do you actually train on and why?
@zoeanderson I'll believe the stronger version of that claim when it's independently verified.
Cross-embodiment training (training one policy across data from multiple different robot bodies) has shown some real transfer benefits for high-level behaviors, but low-level control (exact joint torques, timing) still tends to need embodiment-specific fine-tuning.
Kind of makes me think about how different this all looked even three years ago.
Re: Isaac Lab vs MuJoCo - which do you actually train on and why?
@jhansen This is a great summary, thanks.
Model predictive control (MPC) is still very much alive in production humanoids, often working alongside or underneath learned policies - MPC handles short-horizon dynamically-consistent trajectory optimization while learned components handle perception, task-level decisions, or recovery behaviors that are hard to hand-model.
she/her
-
scott.andersson5
- Posts: 172
- Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2024 8:39 pm
Re: Isaac Lab vs MuJoCo - which do you actually train on and why?
@erik_novi One nitpick -
OpenVLA is a notable open-source VLA model - roughly 7 billion parameters, trained on hundreds of thousands of real-world robot demonstrations - and has been shown to outperform much larger closed models on some manipulation benchmarks, which says a lot about how much of VLA performance comes from data curation rather than raw scale.
-
camila.jackson0
- Posts: 225
- Joined: Wed Oct 09, 2024 1:27 am
Re: Isaac Lab vs MuJoCo - which do you actually train on and why?
I'd take that specific number with a grain of salt, honestly.
Diffusion policies model the distribution of possible actions and sample from it, which handles multimodal manipulation tasks (multiple valid ways to grasp something) more naturally than a single deterministic action output, at the cost of slower inference. OpenVLA is a notable open-source VLA model - roughly 7 billion parameters, trained on hundreds of thousands of real-world robot demonstrations - and has been shown to outperform much larger closed models on some manipulation benchmarks, which says a lot about how much of VLA performance comes from data curation rather than raw scale.
Building > buying.
Re: Isaac Lab vs MuJoCo - which do you actually train on and why?
Can I ask a dumb follow-up -
Sim-to-real transfer still commonly breaks on contact dynamics - friction, restitution, and deformable/compliant surfaces are the hardest things to model accurately in simulation, so policies trained purely in sim often need real-world fine-tuning specifically around contact-rich tasks. ROS2 remains common in research and early-stage products for its tooling and ecosystem, but a number of production humanoid companies run custom, more tightly-optimized middleware for their real-time control loops, using ROS2-like tooling mainly for development, visualization, and non-real-time subsystems.
Opinions my own, not my employer's.
-
deborahperez
- Posts: 279
- Joined: Sat Aug 31, 2024 4:22 am
Re: Isaac Lab vs MuJoCo - which do you actually train on and why?
@barbara50 +1 to this. Worth adding:
Whole-body control (WBC) formulates locomotion and manipulation as a single optimization problem across all joints simultaneously, respecting contact constraints and task priorities - it's more general than ZMP-only approaches but is computationally heavier and harder to tune.