Share your thoughts, 1 month free Claude Pro on usSee more
WorkDL logo mark

Spatial Forcing: Implicit Spatial Representation Alignment for Vision-language-action Model

About

Vision-language-action (VLA) models have recently shown strong potential in enabling robots to follow language instructions and execute precise actions. However, most VLAs are built upon vision-language models pretrained solely on 2D data, which lack accurate spatial awareness and hinder their ability to operate in the 3D physical world. Existing solutions attempt to incorporate explicit 3D sensor inputs such as depth maps or point clouds, but these approaches face challenges due to sensor noise, hardware heterogeneity, and incomplete depth coverage in existing datasets. Alternative methods that estimate 3D cues from 2D images also suffer from the limited performance of depth estimators. We propose Spatial Forcing (SF), a simple yet effective alignment strategy that implicitly forces VLA models to develop spatial comprehension capabilities without relying on explicit 3D inputs or depth estimators. SF aligns intermediate visual embeddings of VLAs with geometric representations produced by pretrained 3D foundation models. By enforcing alignment at intermediate layers, SF guides VLAs to encode richer spatial representations that enhance action precision. Extensive experiments in simulation and real-world environments demonstrate that SF achieves state-of-the-art results, surpassing both 2D- and 3D-based VLAs. SF further accelerates training by up to 3.8x and improves data efficiency across diverse robotic tasks. Project page is at https://spatial-forcing.github.io/

Fuhao Li, Wenxuan Song, Han Zhao, Jingbo Wang, Pengxiang Ding, Donglin Wang, Long Zeng, Haoang Li• 2025

Related benchmarks

TaskDatasetResultRank
Robot ManipulationLIBERO
Object Achievement99.6
957
Robotic ManipulationLIBERO-Plus
Language Understanding Score40.9
249
Robot ManipulationLIBERO (test)
Average Success Rate97.6
220
Robotic ManipulationLIBERO v1 (test)
Average Success Rate78.1
83
Sequential Robotic ManipulationCALVIN
Success Rate (1 task)93.6
63
Robotic ManipulationLIBERO
Spatial Success Rate99.4
52
Robotic ManipulationLIBERO In-distribution
Spatial Achievement Rate98.4
16
Bimanual ManipulationRoboTwin Hard Setting 2.0 (test)
Beat Block Hammer SR35
15
Robotic ManipulationRoboTwin 10 tasks with clean settings 2.0 (test)
Turn switch Success Rate47
9
Bimanual ManipulationRoboTwin 2.0 (Easy)
Move Card Away Success Rate76
8
Showing 10 of 16 rows

Other info

GitHub

Follow for update