UniLAP Robot Learning  ·  Under Review 2026

A Unified Latent Action Policy for Cross‑Embodiment Manipulation

Lei Yao1,2†,  Qiao Feng1,  Mutian Tong1,  Qihao Yun1,  Lap-Pui Chau2,  Lingjie Liu1

1University of Pennsylvania  ·  2The Hong Kong Polytechnic University

† Work done during a visit to the University of Pennsylvania.

Left: prior pipelines quantize the latent into a discrete codebook predicted autoregressively by a VLM. Middle: UniLAP models the latent as a continuous flow distilled from a frozen LAM teacher, acting without future frames at inference. Right: the same pretrained latent adapts to hand‑pose forecasting, single‑arm, humanoid, and real‑robot manipulation, with consistent gains.
01 Abstract

Latent Action Models (LAMs) capture manipulation priors from action‑free video, but discrete latents impose a granularity bottleneck that limits the actions they can represent. Recent continuous alternatives mitigate this, yet they are typically used as proxies for world modeling and require a further planning step to produce executable actions. We introduce UniLAP, a unified continuous latent‑action policy that models the latent space via flow matching and bypasses any reliance on future frames during inference.

By distilling a LAM teacher with a flow‑adaptive objective, UniLAP inherently retains the multimodal action distribution. To decouple the action representation from task‑irrelevant appearance, we extract a label‑free motion target that isolates kinematic cues from spurious visual dynamics. With this embodiment‑agnostic latent space, UniLAP adapts to new embodiments with only a fresh decoder and light finetuning. Pretrained on multi‑source videos at a compact 1.1B-parameter scale, it outperforms state‑of‑the‑art latent‑action and Vision–Language–Action (VLA) baselines across hand‑pose forecasting, single‑arm and humanoid manipulation, and real‑world deployment.

Latent ActionAction‑Free VideoCross‑Embodiment Manipulation

02 Contributions
01

Continuous latent action policy

We model the latent action as a continuous flow conditioned on the current observation, distilling the teacher posterior with a flow‑adaptive objective. It preserves the multimodal distribution a discrete codebook cannot, and acts without future frames, shortening the path from action‑free pretraining to control.

02

Label‑free motion supervision

A motion target derived from cross‑frame correspondences in a frozen ViT grounds the latent in task‑relevant dynamics and isolates it from camera and appearance changes, with no extra factorization stage or optical flow.

03

Cross‑embodiment adaptation

The continuous latent is an embodiment‑agnostic action space shared across human and multi‑robot video. A new robot reuses it with only a fresh action decoder and light finetuning, not per‑robot retraining.

04

Compact yet strong

At just 1.1B parameters (590M trainable), UniLAP matches or beats latent‑action and VLA baselines up to 7B, across hand‑pose forecasting, single‑arm, humanoid, and real‑world manipulation.

03 Method

A continuous latent, distilled then decoded

UniLAP learns a shared latent policy from action‑free video across embodiments. Three components train in two stages: a continuous flow‑matching latent policy, a label‑free motion‑supervision target, and a per‑embodiment action decoder.

Overview. Stage I pretrains a flow‑matching latent policy on action‑free video under a flow‑matching loss; a frozen LAM teacher's posterior is distilled via a flow‑adaptive distillation term, and a cross‑frame correspondence target supervises the motion predictor to regularize the latent. Stage II attaches a per‑embodiment decoder and finetunes the policy to map the latent to executable actions.
Stage I · Action‑free pretraining

Continuous latent action policy

Frozen DINOv2 (fine spatial) and SigLIP2 (vision–language) features plus a Flan‑T5 instruction embedding condition a flow‑matching Transformer, AdaLN on the flow timestep, per‑block cross‑attention. It predicts a horizon‑16 latent chunk from the current observation, with no access to future frames.

  • Distils a continuous LAM teacher (DreamDojo) posterior
  • Flow‑adaptive distillation preserves multimodality
  • Label‑free motion target from frozen‑ViT correspondences
  • Pretrained on human (EgoDex) + multi‑robot video
Stage II · Embodiment adaptation

Per‑embodiment action decoder

A decoder maps the latent chunk to executable commands: proprioception modulates every step via AdaLN, while patch tokens enter through cross‑attention. It is trained from scratch with the policy lightly finetuned, no per‑robot re‑pretraining.

  • Latent stays embodiment‑agnostic and reusable
  • Heads for WidowX / Google robot / GR1 / xArm7
  • Joint‑space or end‑effector output
  • 1.1B total parameters · 590M trainable
Prior pipelines quantize the latent into a discrete codebook; UniLAP models it as a continuous flow, preserving the multimodal distribution manipulation requires, and acting without future frames at inference.
04 Real‑Robot Deployment

A real xArm7, three tabletop tasks

We deploy on a 7‑DoF UFACTORY xArm7 with a single fixed third‑person ZED 2i view, comparing against π0.5 on three tabletop tasks. Following our recipe, we collect 50 teleoperated demonstrations per task, fit an 8‑DoF joint‑space decoder from scratch, and finetune the latent policy. The policy runs chunked control through a two‑process ZMQ client–server loop (observation in, a 16‑step joint chunk out), with no inverse kinematics or camera calibration.

Real-world xArm7 setup and per-task success rates
Real‑world setup & results. Left, the single‑camera xArm7 tabletop workspace. Right, per‑task and average success rate over 50 rollouts vs. π0.5. Tasks escalate in placement precision: a tolerant drop, aligned cup nesting, and a tight cube stack against soft‑contact rebound.

Successful rollouts · buttons switch the object’s initial position

T1  pineapple → bowl
T2  stack white on blue
T3  stack red on yellow cup
OOD  cup → bowl
Success rate (%) over N = 50 rollouts per task; raw successes in parentheses. Best per task in bold.
MethodPineapple → BowlStack CubesStack CupsAvg.
π0.5 (baseline)42 21/5012 6/5014 7/5022.7
UniLAP (ours)46 23/5010 5/5028 14/5028.0

Each method is evaluated over 50 rollouts per task on the physical xArm7.

Out of Distribution

Given the unseen instruction “pick up the red cup and put it into the bowl”, a known object (the red cup, seen only in cup‑stacking) with a known target (the bowl, seen only in the pineapple task) in a combination absent from training, UniLAP reaches 46% (23/50 rollouts), evidence that it recombines learned grounding and skills rather than memorising per‑task trajectories.

188 ms
Inference round‑trip (median)
~4.5 Hz
Achieved action rate
200 Hz
Joint‑servo command rate
150 total
Teleoperated demonstrations

Deploy: NVIDIA RTX PRO 5000 Laptop GPU · 4 flow‑matching steps · 16‑step open‑loop horizon. Latency is task‑independent across all rollouts.

05 Benchmarks

Cross‑embodiment adaptation from a shared latent

The same action‑free pretraining is shared across embodiments; each one adds only a fresh action decoder and a light policy finetune, no per‑robot retraining. At 1.1B parameters, UniLAP compares favorably with latent‑action and VLA baselines up to 7B.

SimplerEnv — WidowX & Google Robot

On WidowX, UniLAP scores 52.1%, exceeding the action‑free baselines UniVLA (+4.2) and mimic‑video (+5.2). On Google Robot it reaches 59.6% under Visual Matching and 57.1% under the perturbed Variant Aggregation, a degradation of only 2.5, which we trace to the appearance‑invariant motion supervision.

WidowX · 4 tasks

Put spoon on table cloth
Put carrot on plate
Stack green on yellow block
Put eggplant in basket

Google Robot · Visual Matching (VM)

Pick coke can
Move object near a target
Open the drawer
Close the drawer

Google Robot · Variant Aggregation (VA)

Pick coke can
Move object near a target
Open the drawer
Close the drawer

RoboCasa‑GR1 — humanoid manipulation

A model pretrained on human + multi‑robot video, transferred to a GR1 humanoid on six articulated, multi‑step RoboCasa tasks (50 episodes each). Rather than learning the policy end‑to‑end on labeled actions, UniLAP adapts its action‑free latent, a low‑cost transfer to a high‑DoF embodiment that reaches a 42.7% average, peaking at 78% on Can → Drawer.

Bottle → Cabinet
Can → Drawer
Cup → Drawer
Milk → Microwave
Potato → Microwave
Wine → Cabinet

Hand‑Pose Forecasting — EgoDex

On EgoDex we forecast bimanual hand pose and report Average / Final Displacement Error (ADE / FDE, metres, lower is better), best‑of-S across S samples. UniLAP posts 0.029 / 0.038 m at S=10, and its relative ADE margin over the strongest X‑IL baseline widens from 13% at S=1 to 24% at S=10, a gain that comes from modeling actions in a latent space, not from flow matching alone.

Predicted hand‑pose rollouts · three EgoDex tasks (1.6 s keypoint trajectories overlaid on the egocentric frame)

Assemble furniture
Stack
Vertical pick & place
06 Analysis

What the latent captures

Two probes indicate the latent encodes action, not appearance: it reconstructs the future from the current frame alone, and it tracks what an instruction asks and where, not its surface wording.

Future-frame reconstruction: teacher vs. ours
Teacher fidelity. From the current frame alone (no future), the latent reconstructs the future at close to the LAM teacher's PSNR.
Latent shift grows with the semantic distance of the instruction edit
Language sensitivity. The latent barely moves under a paraphrase or object swap, but shifts 2.7× / 4.3× under verb / location edits and 17.5× when language is removed.
07 Citation

BibTeX

cite this work
@article{unilap2026,
  title   = {UniLAP: A Unified Latent Action Policy for Cross-Embodiment Manipulation},
  author  = {Lei Yao and Qiao Feng and Mutian Tong and Qihao Yun and Lap-Pui Chau and Lingjie Liu},
  journal = {Under Review},
  year    = {2026},
}

Citation venue and key are placeholders. Replace with the final venue and key on publication.

08 Acknowledgements

UniLAP builds on open datasets, simulators, and pretrained models. The dataset frames and simulator renders shown on this page come from the sources below and remain under their original licenses and terms; the real-robot xArm7 footage and the figures are our own.