Paper detail

Atomic-Probe Governance for Skill Updates in Compositional Robot Policies

Skill libraries in deployed robotic systems are continually updated through fine-tuning, fresh demonstrations, or domain adaptation, yet existing typed-composition methods (BLADE, SymSkill, Generative Skill Chaining) treat the library as frozen at test time and do not analyze how composition outcomes change when a skill is replaced. We introduce a paired-sampling cross-version swap protocol on robosuite manipulation tasks to characterize this dimension of compositional skill learning. On a dual-arm peg-in-hole task we discover a dominant-skill effect: one ECM achieves 86.7% atomic success rate while every other ECM is at or below 26.7%, and whether this dominant ECM enters a composition shifts the success rate by up to +50pp. We characterize the boundary on a simpler pick task where all atomic policies saturate at 100% and the effect is undefined. Across three tasks we further find that off-policy behavioral distance metrics fail to identify the dominant ECM, ruling out the natural cheap predictor. We propose an atomic-quality probe and a Hybrid Selector combining per-skill probes (zero per-decision cost) with selective composition revalidation (full cost), and characterize its Pareto frontier on 144 skill-update decisions. On T6 the atomic-only probe sits 23pp below full revalidation (64.6% vs 87.5% oracle match) at zero per-decision cost; a Hybrid Selector with m=10 closes most of that gap to ~12pp at 46% of full-revalidation cost. On the cross-task average over 144 events, atomic-only is within 3pp of full revalidation under a mixed-oracle caveat. The atomic-quality probe is, to our knowledge, the first principled, deployment-ready primitive for skill-update governance in compositional robot policies.

preprint2026arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.