Track papers across labs, topics, and trends.
Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This paper introduces a framework for assessing the physical admissibility of predicted dynamics in AI systems, emphasizing that low RMSE alone does not guarantee executable actions. By employing a prediction-control interface that evaluates proposals against kinematic and dynamic conditions, the authors demonstrate that their approach can effectively identify invalid proposals while providing detailed feedback on violations. The results show that their method achieves high AUC scores for both one-step predictions and comprehensive evaluations, significantly reducing invalid action proposals while maintaining near-optimal progress.
Low RMSE doesn’t guarantee physical execution; a new framework reveals how to filter out 87-89% of invalid AI action proposals while ensuring high performance.
Predictive Physical AI systems output state rollouts, action chunks, and latent plans, yet a low root-mean-square error (RMSE) does not imply that a particular proposal is physically executable. We formulate physical admissibility as a prediction-control interface: before execution, a decoded proposal is treated as candidate dynamics and evaluated using kinematic, dynamic, and direct-to-composed horizon conditions. Passing is not a certificate of task success; rejection identifies violation of the specified physical envelope and gives a component-level reason. On Hugging Face LeRobot PushT, controlled falsification shows that one-step prediction-RMSE and standardized dynamics residuals reach area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) 0.982 and 0.972, kinematic-only conditions reach AUC 0.592, and the full gate reaches AUC 0.957 with condition-level attribution. In replay-based intervention experiments, residual-based filters and the full physical-admissibility gate prevent 87-$89% of invalid proposals while preserving mean progress near 0.998.