You need to agree to share your contact information to access this model

This repository is publicly accessible, but you have to accept the conditions to access its files and content.

Log in or Sign Up to review the conditions and access this model content.

Checkpoints: Hopfield vs. HAMLET memory-augmented VLA

Trained checkpoints from a controlled comparison of a Modern Hopfield associative-memory module vs. a paper-faithful HAMLET (sequential) memory [Koo et al., ICLR 2026, arXiv:2510.00695], wrapping two frozen-backbone VLAs β€” SmolVLA and pi0 β€” evaluated on four LIBERO suites (Object, Spatial, Goal, Long-horizon).

Full method, code, and paper: hopfield-vla on GitHub

Results summary

3 seeds Γ— 10 episodes/task. mem = memory-on (last RWR round); base = same checkpoint, memory disabled at inference (matched control); Ξ” = mem βˆ’ base.

SmolVLA backbone

Suite Off-shelf Hop mem / base / Ξ” HAM mem / base / Ξ”
Object 84.0 94.0 / 83.0 / +11.0 88.0 / 43.3 / +44.7
Spatial 54.0 83.0 / 41.8 / +41.2 63.7 / 30.3 / +33.4
Goal 84.0 86.0 / 75.7 / +10.3 82.1 / 73.6 / +8.5
Long 35.0 64.7 / 33.3 / +31.4 53.3 / 41.0 / +12.3
Avg 64.3 81.9 / 58.5 / +23.4 71.8 / 47.1 / +24.7

pi0 backbone (cross-backbone check)

Suite Hop mem / base / Ξ” HAM mem / base / Ξ”
Object 94.7 / 79.3 / +15.4 89.0 / 77.8 / +11.2
Spatial 79.0 / 63.3 / +15.7 61.0 / 41.3 / +19.7
Goal 94.0 / 77.3 / +16.7 83.0 / 72.7 / +10.3
Long 61.2 / 29.1 / +32.1 50.2 / 32.3 / +17.9
Avg 82.2 / 62.3 / +19.9 70.8 / 56.0 / +14.8

Hopfield achieves the higher absolute success rate on every suite, on both backbones. See the GitHub repo for best@3 figures, latency benchmarks, and the full evaluation protocol/caveats.

SmolVLA (smolvla_*.pt)

  • smolvla_hopfield_{goal,long}_t{N}_grpo_round{R}.pt β€” Hopfield-memory arm, per-task RWR checkpoint (plateau-stopped round) for task t{N} of the given suite.
  • smolvla_hamlet_{goal,long,object,spatial}_final.pt β€” HAMLET-memory arm, BC-trained checkpoint (one shared checkpoint per suite, used for every task/pool at eval time).

pi0 (pi0_*.pt)

  • pi0_hopfield_{object,spatial,goal,long}_t{N}_round{R}.pt β€” Hopfield-memory arm, per-task RWR peak checkpoint.
  • pi0_hamlet_{object,spatial,goal,long}_step_from_step_{N}.pt β€” HAMLET-memory arm, BC-phase checkpoint (shared across tasks within a suite).

Why some tasks/suites have more than one checkpoint file. Each pi0 task is evaluated across 3 independent eval pools, and each pool's reported number comes from whichever checkpoint (round for Hopfield, BC step for HAMLET) scored best for that pool. So a task can legitimately have up to 3 round/step files behind it β€” these are not redundant duplicates, they're each the exact checkpoint needed to reproduce one pool's result. For HAMLET specifically, the checkpoint is a single shared BC run per suite (not per-task), so the handful of step files per suite are already deduplicated at the physical-checkpoint level across all (task, pool) pairs that happened to peak at the same step.

Methodology

  • SmolVLA: BC warm-start β†’ reward-weighted regression (RWR), evaluated with paired memory-on/memory-off controls at the plateau-stopped final RWR round.
  • pi0: same BC β†’ RWR protocol, backbone frozen, memory module (and where applicable the action expert) trained.

Full results tables, ablations, and evaluation protocol: see the project README.

Citation

@misc{associative_vs_sequential_memory_vla_2026,
  title   = {Associative vs. Sequential Memory in Pre-Trained Vision-Language-Action Models},
  year    = {2026},
  note    = {Preprint}
}
Downloads last month

-

Downloads are not tracked for this model. How to track
Video Preview
loading

Paper for mabyylu/hopfeild