Page 2 of 3

Re: Anyone using human feedback (RLHF-style) for shaping robot behavior preferences?

Posted: Sat Apr 11, 2026 10:10 am
by ethan.lewis5
@gimbalmar65 Slight correction, though the overall point stands: 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.

Re: Anyone using human feedback (RLHF-style) for shaping robot behavior preferences?

Posted: Tue Apr 14, 2026 2:23 am
by mary.taylor6
@ethan.lewis5 I'll believe the stronger version of that claim when it's independently verified. 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.

Re: Anyone using human feedback (RLHF-style) for shaping robot behavior preferences?

Posted: Wed Apr 15, 2026 1:16 am
by emma_whit
@mary.taylor6 Can I ask a dumb follow-up - 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.

Re: Anyone using human feedback (RLHF-style) for shaping robot behavior preferences?

Posted: Thu Apr 23, 2026 4:52 pm
by ethan_fisc
@emma_whit This is exactly the kind of context I was looking for. Zero Moment Point (ZMP) control keeps the robot's center of pressure within its support polygon and has been the classical backbone of bipedal walking for two decades - it's robust and well-understood, but tends to produce a somewhat conservative, flat-footed gait compared to more dynamic approaches. 'Zero-shot sim-to-real' rarely means literally zero real-world tuning in practice - it usually means the policy transfers well enough to be usable with only calibration and minor safety-limit adjustments, rather than needing a full additional training phase on hardware.

Re: Anyone using human feedback (RLHF-style) for shaping robot behavior preferences?

Posted: Sat Apr 25, 2026 3:13 am
by mohammed.rossi
I'd take that specific number with a grain of salt, honestly. 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. 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.

Re: Anyone using human feedback (RLHF-style) for shaping robot behavior preferences?

Posted: Wed Apr 29, 2026 12:30 am
by ananya.novak
@mohammed.rossi From hands-on experience, 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. 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.

Re: Anyone using human feedback (RLHF-style) for shaping robot behavior preferences?

Posted: Sun May 03, 2026 4:32 pm
by nancy_lewi
@ananya.novak This matches something I went through recently. 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.

Re: Anyone using human feedback (RLHF-style) for shaping robot behavior preferences?

Posted: Mon May 11, 2026 2:46 am
by lbianchi
Yeah, this tracks with what I've read as well. 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.

Re: Anyone using human feedback (RLHF-style) for shaping robot behavior preferences?

Posted: Mon May 18, 2026 7:17 pm
by lperez
Respectfully, I think this undersells it a bit. 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.

Re: Anyone using human feedback (RLHF-style) for shaping robot behavior preferences?

Posted: Tue May 19, 2026 2:44 pm
by freya.smith
Side note that might be relevant: 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.