A Safe Action Is Not Enough: Feasible-Future Decoding for Vision-Language-Action Policies
Feasible-future decoding reranks VLA actions by future safe-completion mass, reducing cumulative safety costs by up to 57.5% without retraining or rollouts.
Published Oct 4, 2026▲ 3 on Hugging FacearXiv ↗
Only vote on papers you've read. Sign in with GitHub to vote.
A rigorous derivation of feasible-future mass yields a training-free reranker that cuts safety costs sharply, though its frozen-policy limits, narrow benchmarks, and unquantified approximation overhead leave it unproven against simpler rollout baselines.
Abstract
A safe action is not necessarily a viable one. A frozen vision-language-action (VLA) policy can favor a locally admissible move that leaves no policy-supported route to safe task completion. We call this the feasibility-likelihood gap: likelihood ranks the next move, while feasibility depends on the futures it leaves open. To bring those futures into the decision, we derive the exact next-block marginal of the history-conditioned policy-environment trajectory law restricted to safe task completion. The derivation reveals a candidate-dependent feasible-future mass: its support records whether safe completion remains possible under the frozen continuation process, while its magnitude measures how much weighted safe-completion mass remains. Since exact evaluation is impractical online, we develop a selective finite-candidate approximation and establish conditions for recovering the best retained viable candidate. Our alarm-triggered, training-free reranker VICS-G lowers mean cumulative safety cost by 1.9%-57.5% across six Safety-CHORES settings while remaining within 2.5 percentage points of policy sampling in success and 0.82 steps in mean episode length. Our approach offers a promising and practical path toward safer task completion, grounded in an exact policy-relative target yet requiring neither policy retraining nor online rollouts.