Is Your Imitation Learning Policy Better than Mine? Policy Comparison with Near-Optimal Stopping

Imitation learning has enabled robots to perform complex, long-horizon tasks in challenging dexterous manipulation settings. As new methods are developed, they must be rigorously evaluated and compared against corresponding baselines through repeated evaluation trials. However, policy comparison is fundamentally constrained by a small feasible sample size (e.g., 10 or 50) due to significant human effort and limited inference throughput of policies. This paper proposes a novel statistical framework for rigorously comparing two policies in the small sample size regime. Prior work in statistical policy comparison relies on batch testing, which requires a fixed, pre-determined number of trials and lacks flexibility in adapting the sample size to the observed evaluation data. Furthermore, extending the test with additional trials risks inducing inadvertent p-hacking, undermining statistical assurances. In contrast, our proposed statistical test is sequential, allowing researchers to decide whether or not to run more trials based on intermediate results. This adaptively tailors the number of trials to the difficulty of the underlying comparison, saving significant time and effort without sacrificing probabilistic correctness. Extensive numerical simulation and real-world robot manipulation experiments show that our test achieves near-optimal stopping, letting researchers stop evaluation and make a decision in a near-minimal number of trials. Specifically, it reduces the number of evaluation trials by up to 40% as compared to state-of-the-art baselines, while preserving the probabilistic correctness and statistical power of the comparison. Moreover, our method is strongest in the most challenging comparison instances (requiring the most evaluation trials); in a multi-task comparison scenario, we save the evaluator more than 200 simulation rollouts.

Can We Detect Failures Without Failure Data? Uncertainty-Aware Runtime Failure Detection for Imitation Learning Policies

Recent years have witnessed impressive robotic manipulation systems driven by advances in imitation learning and generative modeling, such as diffusion- and flow-based approaches. As robot policy performance increases, so does the complexity and time horizon of achievable tasks, inducing unexpected and diverse failure modes that are difficult to predict a priori. To enable trustworthy policy deployment in safety-critical human environments, reliable runtime failure detection becomes important during policy inference. However, most existing failure detection approaches rely on prior knowledge of failure modes and require failure data during training, which imposes a significant challenge in practicality and scalability. In response to these limitations, we present FAIL-Detect, a modular two-stage approach for failure detection in imitation learning-based robotic manipulation. To accurately identify failures from successful training data alone, we frame the problem as sequential out-of-distribution (OOD) detection. We first distill policy inputs and outputs into scalar signals that correlate with policy failures and capture epistemic uncertainty. FAIL-Detect then employs conformal prediction (CP) as a versatile framework for uncertainty quantification with statistical guarantees. Empirically, we thoroughly investigate both learned and post-hoc scalar signal candidates on diverse robotic manipulation tasks. Our experiments show learned signals to be mostly consistently effective, particularly when using our novel flow-based density estimator. Furthermore, our method detects failures more accurately and faster than state-of-the-art (SOTA) failure detection baselines. These results highlight the potential of FAIL-Detect to enhance the safety and reliability of imitation learning-based robotic systems as they progress toward real-world deployment.