InterEvolve: Test-Time Evolution of Reward Programs for Humanoid Loco-Manipulation

InterEvolve: Test-Time Evolution of Reward Programs for Humanoid Loco-Manipulation

Zhuo Lin, Sirui Xu, Liuyu Bian, Yu-Xiong Wang, Liang-Yan Gui · N/A · 2026

Framework

N/A

License

N/A

Stars

N/A

Summary

We study test-time evolution for humanoid loco-manipulation: solving tasks that a controller was never trained for by repurposing its existing skills, improving from its own attempts, and retaining what it learns, without retraining.

Abstract Summary

We study test-time evolution for humanoid loco-manipulation: solving tasks that a controller was never trained for by repurposing its existing skills, improving from its own attempts, and retaining what it learns, without retraining. Our key insight is that a broad controller already holds much of the competence a new task needs, and that this competence becomes accessible through an interface between planning and control that is expressive enough to specify contact-rich, multi-stage interactions, yet executable and measurable enough that execution feedback can guide planning from experience. InterEvolve realizes this interface with two components. First, we develop an object-aware forward-backward (FB) behavioral foundation model, whose object residuals on a frozen body prior turn a new reward about the body or objects into loco-manipulation behavior at test time. Second, we specify tasks as reward programs: staged rewards with completion conditions and tunable constants. A large language model (LLM) agent revises the program structure in context, drawing on execution feedback and a skill library of verified programs, while a numerical optimizer tunes its constants. With every candidate verified across parallel simulation scenarios, the program explores new ways to induce, repurpose, and compose the controller's existing motor competence for the task at hand, and thus improves over iterations. Experiments show that human-designed rewards leave much of the FB model's loco-manipulation competence untapped, whereas the programs InterEvolve evolves release it, sometimes through novel strategies. It further produces behaviors for diverse tasks, complex scenes, and long-horizon compositions in simulation, and evolved skills run autonomously on a physical Unitree G1 from egocentric onboard perception.

Key Points

  • We study test-time evolution for humanoid loco-manipulation: solving tasks that a controller was never trained for by repurposing its existing skills, improving from its own attempts, and retaining what it learns, without retraining.
  • Our key insight is that a broad controller already holds much of the competence a new task needs, and that this competence becomes accessible through an interface between planning and control that is expressive enough to specify contact-rich, multi-stage interactions, yet executable and measurable enough that execution feedback can guide planning from experience.
  • InterEvolve realizes this interface with two components
  • First, we develop an object-aware forward-backward (FB) behavioral foundation model, whose object residuals on a frozen body prior turn a new reward about the body or objects into loco-manipulation behavior at test time.
  • Second, we specify tasks as reward programs: staged rewards with completion conditions and tunable constants.

Method

InterEvolve adapts a fixed whole-body controller to new loco-manipulation tasks by evolving a reward programs at test time, and keeps verified programs in a skill library for later tasks to build on (Fig. 2 ). Sec. 3.1 formalizes this evolving problem and its budget. Sec. 3.2 defines reward programs, the editable task strategies that the evolve operates on. Sec.

3.3 shows how an object-aware forward-backward (FB) behavioral foundation model executes a reward program without retraining. Sec.

Method — InterEvolve: Test-Time Evolution of Reward Programs for Humanoid Loco-Manipulation
Figure 2: InterEvolve overview. (a) Given a task and scene, an LLM agent writes a staged reward program, drawing on verified programs in the skill library. (b) The forward-backward model scores the active stage’s reward over a fixed state bank and projects it into a latent prompt, which a frozen body prior and a pretrained object residual execute without retraining. (c) A fixed verifier scores parallel rollouts, and criterion-level feedback drives the next structural revision (outer loop), while CMA-ES tunes the program constants (inner loop).

Experiments

This section verifies that our low-level controller already holds much of the competence a new task needs, and that test-time scaling over reward programs makes it accessible, through three questions. ( i ) Competence: can object-aware motor model provide reusable whole-body interaction, and does better reward improve tracking (Sec. 4.2 )?

( ii ) Access: without reference motion, does execution-guided evolution reach behaviors fixed programs miss, and which evolution components produce the gain (Sec.

Experiments — InterEvolve: Test-Time Evolution of Reward Programs for Humanoid Loco-Manipulation
Figure 3: Dexterous hands and long-horizon composition. (a) The G1 with Inspire hands, tracking a reference with the tracking reward calibrated by InterEvolve. Left : whole-body view at the moment of lift; Right : close-ups of the manipulation phases. (b) Arranging six boxes by the evolution. Left : top-down trace of the robot (gray) and each box from its start (outlined square) to its target cell (dashed circle); numbers give the push order. Right : the robot pushing each box.

Sources and Demonstrations

Figures are reproduced from Lin et al. See the full paper for experimental details and the project page, when the paper links one, for demonstrations and videos.

Share

Related Papers

A Sim-to-Real Integration Pipeline for Training and Deployment of Chunk-Based VLA Manipulation Policies
arXiv preprint

A Sim-to-Real Integration Pipeline for Training and Deployment of Chunk-Based VLA Manipulation Policies

Mathilde Kappel, Clémence Grislain, Mohamed Chetouani et al.

Vision-Language-Action (VLA) models have become a prominent paradigm for mapping multimodal inputs, including semantic instructions, visual observations of the scene, and proprioceptive observations, to robot actions.

manipulation vision vla reinforcement-learning sim-to-real control learning-from-demonstration benchmark
PDF Advanced
Autonomous Droplet Navigation via Model-Based Reinforcement Learning: Zero-Shot Transfer and Emergent Dynamics
arXiv preprint

Autonomous Droplet Navigation via Model-Based Reinforcement Learning: Zero-Shot Transfer and Emergent Dynamics

Rajneesh Anand, Mayuresh V. Kothare

Self-driving laboratories (SDLs) are transforming chemical and materials discovery through closed-loop automation, yet automated infrastructure for physical manipulation of soft, deformable matter remains beyond current robotic platforms.

manipulation vision reinforcement-learning planning control
Code PDF Intermediate
GitHub ★ —