Loading
Life sciences · Preprint
arXiv · November 4, 2026
No summary has been generated for this record yet. What follows is drawn from its source metadata only.
Preprint.
No findings were extractable from the material analysed.
Safety was not reported in the material analysed. Check the source before drawing any conclusion about harm.
The source did not state who this applies to in practice.
Graded across the dimensions that decide whether you should act, each from what the source actually supports. There is no single score, and where a dimension was not assessed it says so.
This record has not been graded across any dimension yet. Treat the label above as provisional and read the source.
What is missing. This record has no bottom line, key findings, reported figures, evidence dimensions. That is a gap in the analysis, not a judgement about the study.
A robot action can satisfy shape and range constraints yet carry the wrong semantics: axes may be permuted, signs inverted, rotations rescaled, or gripper polarity reversed. We study learned state-action-effect relations as offline contracts for detecting these mismatches and ranking their likely fields. Clean held-out transitions calibrate alarms; a fixed inverse vocabulary supports closed-set localization. On ten LIBERO Spatial tasks comprising 432 source episodes, a capacity-controlled comparison at 2.5% empirical clean false-positive rate gives 46.1% recall for a ridge forward residual, 61.0% for a four-component joint Gaussian mixture, and 65.7% for the exact conditional of that same mixture. The joint score retains a 14.9 percentage-point advantage over ridge, while conditioning improves recall by a further 4.7 points. Joint scoring instead has higher localization: 95.8% versus 94.6%. These matched-rate comparisons are retrospective diagnostics, not deployment calibration guarantees. Earlier Object/Goal results broaden tasks within the LIBERO convention; DROID, all three HYDRA tasks, short temporal faults, small offsets, exact repair, and simulated mitigation fail their respective gates, while xArm contributes one task only. The evidence supports a bounded offline diagnostic and a detection-localization tradeoff, rather than joint-density superiority or cross-robot safety.