Abstract:In recent years roboticists have achieved remarkable progress in solving increasingly general tasks on dexterous robotic hardware by leveraging high capacity Transformer network architectures and generative diffusion models. Unfortunately, combining these two orthogonal improvements has proven surprisingly difficult, since there is no clear and well-understood process for making important design choices. In this paper, we identify, study and improve key architectural design decisions for high-capacity diffusion transformer policies. The resulting models can efficiently solve diverse tasks on multiple robot embodiments, without the excruciating pain of per-setup hyper-parameter tuning. By combining the results of our investigation with our improved model components, we are able to present a novel architecture, named \method, that significantly outperforms the state of the art in solving long-horizon ($1500+$ time-steps) dexterous tasks on a bi-manual ALOHA robot. In addition, we find that our policies show improved scaling performance when trained on 10 hours of highly multi-modal, language annotated ALOHA demonstration data. We hope this work will open the door for future robot learning techniques that leverage the efficiency of generative diffusion modeling with the scalability of large scale transformer architectures. Code, robot dataset, and videos are available at: https://dit-policy.github.io
Abstract:Evaluation of large language models (LLMs) for code has primarily relied on static benchmarks, including HumanEval (Chen et al., 2021), which measure the ability of LLMs to generate complete code that passes unit tests. As LLMs are increasingly used as programmer assistants, we study whether gains on existing benchmarks translate to gains in programmer productivity when coding with LLMs, including time spent coding. In addition to static benchmarks, we investigate the utility of preference metrics that might be used as proxies to measure LLM helpfulness, such as code acceptance or copy rates. To do so, we introduce RealHumanEval, a web interface to measure the ability of LLMs to assist programmers, through either autocomplete or chat support. We conducted a user study (N=213) using RealHumanEval in which users interacted with six LLMs of varying base model performance. Despite static benchmarks not incorporating humans-in-the-loop, we find that improvements in benchmark performance lead to increased programmer productivity; however gaps in benchmark versus human performance are not proportional -- a trend that holds across both forms of LLM support. In contrast, we find that programmer preferences do not correlate with their actual performance, motivating the need for better, human-centric proxy signals. We also open-source RealHumanEval to enable human-centric evaluation of new models and the study data to facilitate efforts to improve code models.