The AI Front Page

Reading signals from this article are folded back into your front page ranking on this device.

Research/arXiv AI/ML/July 29, 2026 at 5:51 PM

arXiv paper: HumanCLAW: Can Vision-Language Models Act Through a Body?

A new arXiv AI paper by Siyao Li, Jiawei Gu, and Shuai Liu, and 15 more studies HumanCLAW: Can Vision-Language Models Act Through a Body?.

ResearchAI
Research / arXiv AI/ML
Source

Follow arXiv AI/ML to make it a durable For You signal.

arXiv ID: 2607.27180v1 Title: HumanCLAW: Can Vision-Language Models Act Through a Body? Authors: Siyao Li, Jiawei Gu, Shuai Liu, Kairui Hu, Zekun Li, Linjie Li, Chengcheng Tang, Po-Chen Wu, Ivan Shugurov, Lingni Ma, Michael Zollhoefer, Sizhe An, Abhay Mittal, Amy Zhao, Ranjay Krishna, Manling Li, Ziwei Liu, Chuan Guo Primary category: cs.CV Categories: cs.CV, cs.RO Comment: Project page: https://human-claw.github.io/ Published: 2026-07-29T17:51:36Z Updated: 2026-07-29T17:51:36Z Abstract: Evaluating whether a vision-language model (VLM) can act through a physical body is challenging. The outcome of an action couples the VLM's decision with motor control. When a task fails, it is hard to tell whether the VLM made a bad choice or the motor controller simply failed to execute it, e.g., losing balance and falling. In this work, we introduce HumanCLAW, an evaluation framework that decouples action decision-making from low-level execution. At every step, a harnessed, off-the-shelf VLM issues an atomic skill command, and the command is translated into a sub-second chunk of continuous full-body motion with real physical consequences, including gravity and collisions. The body can therefore act freely in the physical world, while execution-side disturbances, balance and motor errors, are factored out. What remains measurable is the model's action intelligence: its moment-to-moment choice of what the body should execute next. Based on this framework, we build HumanCLAW-Bench: 1,218 long-horizon, egocentric find-navigate-interact episodes across 41 indoor scenes. We test nine state-of-the-art VLMs and find that none solves the benchmark; the best model reaches only a 16.8% success rate. Recognizing the target is not the bottleneck. What current VLMs lack is embodied self-awareness: they lose track of their own body, failing to tell where it is, whether it has reached the goal, or whether it has hit an obstacle. PDF: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2607.27180v1