# CAPER: Constrained and Procedural Reasoning for Robotic Scientific Experiments

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.09367 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.09367/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Spatial and embodied reasoning, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning.
- Builds on 6 of its 34 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 10 Feb 2026.

## Placed in

- LLM reasoning / [Spatial and embodied reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/lr/spatial-and-embodied-reasoning/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 6 of 6)

- [LLaMA: Open and Efficient Foundation Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.13971/) (2023)
- [π0.5: a Vision-Language-Action Model with Open-World Generalization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.16054/) (2025)
- [A Survey on Vision-Language-Action Models for Embodied AI](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.14093/) (2024)
- [ForceVLA: Enhancing VLA Models with a Force-aware MoE for Contact-rich Manipulation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.22159/) (2025)
- [MoLe-VLA: Dynamic Layer-skipping Vision Language Action Model via Mixture-of-Layers for Efficient Robot Manipulation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.20384/) (2025)
- [CaStL: Constraints as Specifications through LLM Translation for Long-Horizon Task and Motion Planning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.22225/) (2024)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Robotic assistance in scientific laboratories requires procedurally correct long-horizon manipulation, reliable execution under limited supervision, and robustness in low-demonstration regimes. Such conditions greatly challenge end-to-end vision-language-action (VLA) models, whose assumptions of recoverable errors and data-driven policy learning often break down in protocol-sensitive experiments. We propose CAPER, a framework for Constrained And ProcEdural Reasoning for robotic scientific experiments, which explicitly restricts where learning and reasoning occur in the planning and control pipeline. Rather than strengthening end-to-end policies, CAPER enforces a responsibility-separated structure: task-level reasoning generates procedurally valid action sequences under explicit constraints, mid-level multimodal grounding realizes subtasks without delegating spatial decision-making to large language models, and low-level control adapts to physical uncertainty via reinforcement learning with minimal demonstrations. By encoding procedural commitments through interpretable intermediate representations, CAPER prevents execution-time violations of experimental logic, improving controllability, robustness, and data efficiency. Experiments on a scientific workflow benchmark and a public long-horizon manipulation dataset demonstrate consistent improvements in success rate and procedural correctness, particularly in low-data and long-horizon settings.