Skip to content
AI News HubLIVE
Original source2 min read

Capability-Aware Arbitration for Semantic Intent-Based Shared Control

Summary

This paper introduces a capability-aware shared-control framework in which a vision-language model (VLM) infers human intent and supplies semantic-intent confidence, while a vision-language-action (VLA) policy generates autonomous actions and its capability confidence is estimated online from the dispersion and local instability of stochastic action trajectories. A nonlinear arbitration policy combines Bayesian-filtered intent confidence with VLA capability confidence via a sigmoid mapping to adapt robot authority. In a 12-participant study, the method reached a 92% task success rate, beating manual teleoperation (83%), intent-only arbitration (44%), and fixed equal-weight blending (10%), while also improving control friendliness and reducing authority-weighted disagreement.

SourcearXiv RoboticsAuthor: Zhaoda Du, Michael Bowman, Xiaoli Zhang
Capability-Aware Arbitration for Semantic Intent-Based Shared Control
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 Sep 2026]

Title:Capability-Aware Arbitration for Semantic Intent-Based Shared Control

View a PDF of the paper titled Capability-Aware Arbitration for Semantic Intent-Based Shared Control, by Zhaoda Du and 2 other authors

View PDF HTML (experimental)

Abstract:Shared control often allocates robot authority based on confidence in inferred human intent, assuming reliable autonomous execution. When this assumption fails, high intent confidence can cause over-helping. We present a capability-aware shared-control framework in which a vision-language model (VLM) infers human intent and provides semantic-intent confidence, while a vision-language-action (VLA) policy generates autonomous actions. VLA capability confidence is estimated online from the dispersion and local instability of stochastic action trajectories. We design a nonlinear arbitration policy that combines Bayesian-filtered semantic-intent confidence with VLA capability confidence through a sigmoid mapping to adapt robot authority. Our evaluation combined VLM/VLA confidence assessment with a study involving 12 participants performing pick-and-place and bidirectional stacking under in-distribution and out-of-distribution conditions. The proposed method achieved the highest task success rate (92%), compared with manual teleoperation (83%), intent-only arbitration (44%), and fixed equal-weight blending (10%). It also achieved higher control friendliness and lower authority-weighted disagreement than both shared-control baselines. These results demonstrate the benefit of incorporating VLA capability into authority allocation to mitigate over-helping and improve shared-control performance.

Subjects:

Robotics (cs.RO)

Cite as: arXiv:2609.25369 [cs.RO]

(or arXiv:2609.25369v1 [cs.RO] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.25369

arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

Submission history

From: Zhaoda Du [view email] [v1] Mon, 21 Sep 2026 20:08:39 UTC (7,357 KB)

Full-text links:

Access Paper:

View a PDF of the paper titled Capability-Aware Arbitration for Semantic Intent-Based Shared Control, by Zhaoda Du and 2 other authors

View PDF

HTML (experimental)

TeX Source

view license

Current browse context:

cs.RO

new | recent | 2026-09

Change to browse by:

cs

References & Citations

NASA ADS

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

  • A VLM infers human intent and provides semantic-intent confidence, while a VLA policy generates actions whose capability confidence is estimated online from trajectory dispersion and local instability.
  • A nonlinear arbitration policy fuses Bayesian-filtered intent confidence with VLA capability confidence through a sigmoid mapping to adapt robot authority.
  • The approach achieved a 92% task success rate with 12 participants under in-distribution and out-of-distribution conditions, versus 83% for manual teleoperation and 44%/10% for two shared-control baselines.
  • Results show that incorporating VLA capability into authority allocation mitigates over-helping and improves shared-control performance.

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