# Self-Refining Vision Language Model for Robotic Failure Detection and Reasoning

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.12405 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.12405/

## Key facts

- Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Spatial and embodied reasoning, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning.
- Builds on 49 of its 56 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 12 Feb 2026.

## Placed in

- LLM reasoning / [Spatial and embodied reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/lr/spatial-and-embodied-reasoning/)
- Multimodal LLMs / vision-language models / [Embodied and 3D vision-language models](https://mlsanity.com/mllm/embodied-and-3d-vision-language-models/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 49)

- [BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understanding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1810.04805/) (2018)
- [Learning Transferable Visual Models From Natural Language Supervision](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.00020/) (2021)
- [LLaMA: Open and Efficient Foundation Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.13971/) (2023)
- [Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2201.11903/) (2022)
- [Qwen3 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.09388/) (2025)
- [Visual Instruction Tuning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.08485/) (2023)
- [Hierarchical Text-Conditional Image Generation with CLIP Latents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2204.06125/) (2022)
- [Qwen2.5-VL Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.13923/) (2025)
- [GPT-4o System Card](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.21276/) (2024)
- [Reflexion: Language Agents with Verbal Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.11366/) (2023)
- [Toolformer: Language Models Can Teach Themselves to Use Tools](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.04761/) (2023)
- [Self-Refine: Iterative Refinement with Self-Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.17651/) (2023)
- [Sigmoid Loss for Language Image Pre-Training](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.15343/) (2023)
- [Voyager: An Open-Ended Embodied Agent with Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.16291/) (2023)
- [Improving Factuality and Reasoning in Language Models through Multiagent Debate](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.14325/) (2023)
- [Teaching Large Language Models to Self-Debug](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.05128/) (2023)
- [Show Your Work: Scratchpads for Intermediate Computation with Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2112.00114/) (2021)
- [CRITIC: Large Language Models Can Self-Correct with Tool-Interactive Critiquing](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.11738/) (2023)
- [Fine-Tuning can Distort Pretrained Features and Underperform Out-of-Distribution](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2202.10054/) (2022)
- [RLBench: The Robot Learning Benchmark & Learning Environment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1909.12271/) (2019)
- [Self-Rewarding Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.10020/) (2024)
- [PAL: Program-aided Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2211.10435/) (2022)
- [Language Agent Tree Search Unifies Reasoning Acting and Planning in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.04406/) (2023)
- [Self-Play Fine-Tuning Converts Weak Language Models to Strong Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.01335/) (2024)
- [InternVideo: General Video Foundation Models via Generative and Discriminative Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.03191/) (2022)
- [AgentTuning: Enabling Generalized Agent Abilities for LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.12823/) (2023)
- [ManiSkill: Generalizable Manipulation Skill Benchmark with Large-Scale Demonstrations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2107.14483/) (2021)
- [Scalable Best-of-N Selection for Large Language Models via Self-Certainty](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.18581/) (2025)
- [Direct Nash Optimization: Teaching Language Models to Self-Improve with General Preferences](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.03715/) (2024)
- [REFLECT: Summarizing Robot Experiences for Failure Explanation and Correction](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.15724/) (2023)

## Built on by (most cited first, 7 of 7)

- [Learning Actionable Manipulation Recovery via Counterfactual Failure Synthesis](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.13528/) (2026)
- [Hide-and-Seek in Trajectories: Discovering Failure Signals for VLA Runtime Monitoring](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.30834/) (2026)
- [Foresight: Iterative Reasoning About Clues that Matter for Navigation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.12550/) (2026)
- [FabriMAE I Trust Myself? Self-Evaluating VLA Action Generation with Markov Attention Entropy](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.16697/) (2026)
- [FailBench: How Reliable are VLMs at Judging Robot Task Success?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.03611/) (2026)
- [CARE: Experience-Guided Atomic Corrective Execution for Vision-Language-Action Policies](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.24118/) (2026)
- [Reflect After Failure: Brain-Inspired Self-Evolving Agents for Embodied Spatial Intelligence](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2610.20312/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Reasoning about failures is crucial for building reliable and trustworthy robotic systems. Prior approaches either treat failure reasoning as a closed-set classification problem or assume access to ample human annotations. Failures in the real world are typically subtle, combinatorial, and difficult to enumerate, whereas rich reasoning labels are expensive to acquire. We address this problem by introducing ARMOR: Adaptive Round-based Multi-task mOdel for Robotic failure detection and reasoning. We formulate detection and reasoning as a multi-task self-refinement process, where the model iteratively predicts detection outcomes and natural language reasoning conditioned on past outputs. During training, ARMOR learns from heterogeneous supervision - large-scale sparse binary labels and small-scale rich reasoning annotations - optimized via a combination of offline and online imitation learning. At inference time, ARMOR generates multiple refinement trajectories and selects the most confident prediction via a self-certainty metric. Experiments across diverse environments show that ARMOR achieves state-of-the-art performance by improving over the previous approaches by up to 30% on failure detection rate and up to 100% in reasoning measured through LLM fuzzy match score, demonstrating robustness to heterogeneous supervision and open-ended reasoning beyond predefined failure modes. We provide additional visualizations on our website: https://sites.google.com/utexas.edu/armor