RobotAPO: Adversarial Physics Preference Optimization for Robotic Manipulation Video Generation

Engineering notes

Engineering notes will be added by the Robot Papers editorial team.

Chinese explanation / 中文解读

中文解读待补充：本站会优先为 VLA、具身智能、人形机器人控制、机器人操作等高价值论文补充中文说明。

Original abstract

Robotic manipulation videos are increasingly used as visual plans for embodied agents, but optimizing purely for visual plausibility often fails to capture the fragile physical manifold of real-world interactions. Even minor physics-violating errors at the interaction boundary, such as interpenetration or premature object motion, can completely invalidate the inferred timing and pose needed for downstream execution. Because standard supervised fine-tuning lacks the direct pressure to penalize these localized failures, we introduce AgiBot-PhysPref. This rigorously curated 10,000-sample preference dataset isolates condition-matched physics violations, turning the generator's own failure distribution into a foundational signal for physical consistency. Building upon this, we propose RobotAPO, an adversarial physics preference optimization framework operating in the continuous flow-matching denoising space. To prevent the policy from merely memorizing static curated failures, RobotAPO employs a lightweight adversarial counterfactual proposer that learns a condition-dependent, physical-failure-biased direction in denoising space. This encourages the model to explore and better respect the physical interaction boundary, all while maintaining a pure prompt-and-reference inference interface without requiring external structural conditioning. Comprehensive evaluations demonstrate that explicitly correcting these localized physics violations improves downstream robot execution from generated videos. On held-out AgiBot conditions, RobotAPO outperforms the strongest controlled internal baseline in physical consistency by 6.8% hard score and 10.0% soft score. Crucially, in real-robot replay, it translates these physical-consistency gains into a 37.4% relative improvement in task success over the strongest controlled internal baseline.

Links and sources

• Official / arXiv page
• PDF from original source

Comments