At #CoRL2026 I'm hearing several variations on "agents may be effective at robot decision-making, but they’re too slow" or "not reactive".
[E.g., motivating VLAs/WAMs.]
I think this means at least 3 different things depending on how the agent is being used. 🧵
Similar confusion for "agents aren’t closed-loop / reactive." True in (a). But in (b) and (c) the agent outputs a program, and a program can be a closed-loop policy running at control rates.
✈️If you are at @corl_conf today, make sure to stop by the Late Breaking Results posters at 1 pm EST, where my amazing co-authors will be presenting our work!
🔗 Paper, videos and new Opus 5.5 results: https://t.co/znk0mOlJjH
This week's #PaperILike is "Principles and Applications of Continual Computation" (Eric Horvitz [yes, that one!], 2001).
An early work on "sleep time" compute, increasingly relevant for agents (e.g., https://t.co/33xbTaOU8j).
PDF: https://t.co/X3LFy2WMgY
This week's #PaperILike is "On-line Policy Improvement using Monte-Carlo Search" (Tesauro & Galperin, 1996).
A classic example of combined learning and planning, a precursor to AlphaZero (in backgammon), and an easy read.
PDF: https://t.co/MRGGLJw8n6
Excited to share UniPred, accepted to the IEEE T-RO 2026(SI on FM for Robotics)! Robots plan long tasks with concepts, but demonstrations only show actions. UniPred learn how to invents those concepts with agent in the loop. 🧵
More in: https://t.co/3RaO7hTeAA
DataFarm is cool! Making procedurally generated data look less "robotic" makes a lot of sense. Here's a lightweight JAX/PyRoki port if people are interested, should make it easier to use outside of the TiPToP framework
https://t.co/6LoYeMckrH
This week's #PaperILike is "Human-robot collaborative task planning using anticipatory brain responses" (Ehrlich et al., PLOS One 2023).
Talking is too much effort. I want robots to read my mind! (+nice HRI / collaborative planning insights)
PDF: https://t.co/rEYoCL9tSS
How should we approach research, when the very field we work on is going through rapid and potentially fundamental changes?
I recently gave a talk at the Stanford Vision Seminar, reflecting on my PhD journey and how AI is changing the way I think about research. I adapted part of it into a new blog post, organized around three questions:
1. What should we work on?
2. How should we work with AI?
3. What is a PhD for?
I hope some of my reflections are helpful. The talk ended with an open discussion, and I’d love to continue it here; curious how others are thinking about these questions.
Personally -- as much as there's FOMO, I also think life is very long, and we have time.
https://t.co/DytwGOzBLy
Me: Put the green box on target, clearing obstructions.
Astra: You got it, boss 🫡
(Purely python solution generated in a red teamed sandbox using no any other tools, with $20 budget)
This week's #PaperILike is a break from the usual: "Worms and science," a 2003 interview with Sydney Brenner.
On choosing problems, hypothesis-driven vs data-driven science, and knowing when to move on (in his case, from molecular bio).
PDF: https://t.co/WEm5PszlCM
Teleoperators collecting data to fine-tune VLAs are spending valuable time demonstrating actions robots already know how to do.
TANDEM combines task and motion planning (TAMP) with human teleoperation only as needed, reducing human effort.
(1/8)
😫Tired of spending hours teleoperating robots?
🚀What if you could collect 2.9× more demonstrations with the same human effort?
Introducing TANDEM: our new work that combines autonomous task and motion planning (TAMP) with human teleoperation only when needed. 🧵 1/n
Teleoperators collecting data to fine-tune VLAs are spending valuable time demonstrating actions robots already know how to do.
TANDEM combines task and motion planning (TAMP) with human teleoperation only as needed, reducing human effort.
(1/8)