# VLA-Scope: Shift-Aware Failure Prediction for Vision-Language-Action Models

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.21246 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.21246/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Failure recovery and robustness, one of 13 directions in Vision-language-action models.
- Builds on 19 of its 21 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 18 Sep 2026.

## Placed in

- Vision-language-action models / [Failure recovery and robustness](https://mlsanity.com/vla/failure-recovery-and-robustness/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 19 of 19)

- [RT-2: Vision-Language-Action Models Transfer Web Knowledge to Robotic Control](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.15818/) (2023)
- [OpenVLA: An Open-Source Vision-Language-Action Model](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.09246/) (2024)
- [π0: A Vision-Language-Action Flow Model for General Robot Control](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.24164/) (2024)
- [A Baseline for Detecting Misclassified and Out-of-Distribution Examples in Neural Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1610.02136/) (2016)
- [A Simple Unified Framework for Detecting Out-of-Distribution Samples and Adversarial Attacks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1807.03888/) (2018)
- [LIBERO: Benchmarking Knowledge Transfer for Lifelong Robot Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.03310/) (2023)
- [Energy-based Out-of-distribution Detection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2010.03759/) (2020)
- [Generalized Out-of-Distribution Detection: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.11334/) (2021)
- [FAST: Efficient Action Tokenization for Vision-Language-Action Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.09747/) (2025)
- [LIBERO-Plus: In-depth Robustness Analysis of Vision-Language-Action Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.13626/) (2025)
- [THE COLOSSEUM: A Benchmark for Evaluating Generalization for Robotic Manipulation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.08191/) (2024)
- [SAFE: Multitask Failure Detection for Vision-Language-Action Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.09937/) (2025)
- [Unpacking Failure Modes of Generative Policies: Runtime Monitoring of Consistency and Progress](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.04640/) (2024)
- [Can We Detect Failures Without Failure Data? Uncertainty-Aware Runtime Failure Detection for Imitation Learning Policies](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.08558/) (2025)
- [Failure Prediction at Runtime for Generative Robot Policies](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.09459/) (2025)
- [VLA Models Are More Generalizable Than You Think: Revisiting Physical and Spatial Modeling](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2512.02902/) (2025)
- [ActProbe: Action-Space Probe for Early Failure Detection of Generative Robot Policies](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.08508/) (2026)
- [Early Warning Signals for OpenVLA Failure under Visual Distribution Shift](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.29699/) (2026)
- [SAFECAST: Robust Failure Detection for VLA Policies with Contrast-Set Training and Calibration](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.04246/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Vision-language-action (VLA) models map visual observations and natural-language instructions to robotic actions, but distribution shifts can compromise their reliability. Because these models may still succeed under out-of-distribution (OOD) conditions, detecting OOD inputs alone is insufficient to predict execution failure. In this paper, we introduce VLA-Scope, a two-stage framework that combines input-shift characterization with execution history to predict failure during OOD rollouts. The first stage uses pooled image and language representations to detect OOD inputs and classify their shift categories. For inputs flagged as OOD, the second stage combines the predicted category, action-prefix features, and execution progress features. A logistic regression model shared across shift categories updates failure risk as execution proceeds. We evaluate the framework with OpenVLA on ten LIBERO-Spatial tasks using leave-one-group-out cross-validation. OOD detection achieves a ROC-AUC of 0.9454, and shift classification achieves 91% accuracy. Evaluated independently of the OOD gate on all 1,400 OOD rollouts, the failure predictor achieves a ROC-AUC of 0.8497 after 60 executed actions, compared with 0.7906 without execution progress features. It also achieves a higher ROC-AUC than the evaluated ActProbe and SAFE-MLP baselines. These results suggest that combining action features with temporally aggregated execution step representations improves failure prediction under input shifts.