Skip to content
AI News HubLIVE
Source content · Analysis pending2 min read

Alpha: Systematic Fault Injection and Robustness Evaluation for LLM-Driven Embodied Manipulation

Summary

arXiv:2610.30197v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly integrated into embodied robotic planning, yet standard benchmarks primarily evaluate end-to-end task completion in nominal environments, obscuring failure origins across the execution stack. We present Alpha, a systematic fault-injection and robustness-evaluation framework for LLM-driven manipulation in simulation. Alpha injects calibrated faults across perception (sensor lag), actuation (grip slip), kinematics (unreachable targets), and planning (planner-output corruption), alongside concurrent conditions. To separate physical vulnerabilities from planner sensitivities, we introduce a matched methodology pairing an LLM agent (Llama-3 via Ollama) against a deterministic Scripted Oracle planner a…

SourcearXiv RoboticsAuthor: Jona Joy
Alpha: Systematic Fault Injection and Robustness Evaluation for LLM-Driven Embodied Manipulation
Report an error

The correction channel is not available yet. You can copy the article reference below for later.

Correction instructions
Read article

[Submitted on 21 Oct 2026]

Title:Alpha: Systematic Fault Injection and Robustness Evaluation for LLM-Driven Embodied Manipulation

View a PDF of the paper titled Alpha: Systematic Fault Injection and Robustness Evaluation for LLM-Driven Embodied Manipulation, by Jona Joy

View PDF HTML (experimental)

Abstract:Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly integrated into embodied robotic planning, yet standard benchmarks primarily evaluate end-to-end task completion in nominal environments, obscuring failure origins across the execution stack. We present Alpha, a systematic fault-injection and robustness-evaluation framework for LLM-driven manipulation in simulation. Alpha injects calibrated faults across perception (sensor lag), actuation (grip slip), kinematics (unreachable targets), and planning (planner-output corruption), alongside concurrent conditions. To separate physical vulnerabilities from planner sensitivities, we introduce a matched methodology pairing an LLM agent (Llama-3 via Ollama) against a deterministic Scripted Oracle planner across a balanced 150-episode matrix under identical seeds, geometries, and safety criteria. Across the matrix, the Oracle achieves 64.0% (48/75) success while the LLM achieves 44.0% (33/75) (paired McNemar p = 3.01 x 10^-4). Crucially, excluding planner-output corruption, performance across all physical and kinematic conditions is identical: 55.0% (33/60) for both planners with zero discordant pairs (McNemar p = 1.00). This demonstrates that physical actuator slip, kinematic reach boundaries, and perceptual staleness affect deterministic controllers and LLM planners equivalently. The performance gap is driven entirely by planner-output corruption (100% Oracle vs. 0% LLM), isolating the prompt-to-JSON serialization and validation interface rather than a cognitive reasoning deficit. We also audit 169 historical pilot attempts for transparency.

Comments: 9 pages, 7 figures, 6 tables. Code and reproduction artifacts: this https URL

Subjects:

Robotics (cs.RO)

Cite as: arXiv:2610.30197 [cs.RO]

(or arXiv:2610.30197v1 [cs.RO] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.30197

arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

Submission history

From: Jona Joy [view email] [v1] Wed, 21 Oct 2026 07:06:59 UTC (2,120 KB)

Full-text links:

Access Paper:

View a PDF of the paper titled Alpha: Systematic Fault Injection and Robustness Evaluation for LLM-Driven Embodied Manipulation, by Jona Joy

View PDF

HTML (experimental)

TeX Source

view license

Additional Features

Audio Summary

Current browse context:

cs.RO

new | recent | 2026-10

Change to browse by:

cs

References & Citations

SciX

Google Scholar

Semantic Scholar

Loading...

Data provided by:

Bibliographic Tools

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Bibliographic Explorer Toggle

Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)

Connected Papers Toggle

Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)

Litmaps Toggle

Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)

scite.ai Toggle

scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)

Code, Data, Media

Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article

alphaXiv Toggle

alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?)

Links to Code Toggle

CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)

DagsHub Toggle

DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)

GotitPub Toggle

Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)

Huggingface Toggle

Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?)

ScienceCast Toggle

ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)

Demos

Demos

Replicate Toggle

Replicate (What is Replicate?)

Spaces Toggle

Hugging Face Spaces (What is Spaces?)

Spaces Toggle

TXYZ.AI (What is TXYZ.AI?)

Related Papers

Recommenders and Search Tools

Link to Influence Flower

Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)

Core recommender toggle

CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)

Author

Venue

Institution

Topic

About arXivLabs

arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)

Key points and analysis

Article intelligence

InvestorsAdvanced

Key points

  • AI generation is temporarily unavailable; this entry was preserved with deterministic fallback metadata.
  • arXiv:2610.30197v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly integrated into embodied robotic planning, yet standard benchmarks primarily evaluate…

Highlights and analysis are generated automatically and may contain errors. Check the original source.