X-Nav: Learning End-to-End Cross-Embodiment Navigation for Mobile Robots
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Existing navigation methods are primarily designed for specific robot embodiments, limiting their generalizability across diverse robot platforms. In this paper, we introduce X-Nav, a novel framework for end-to-end cross-embodiment navigation where a single unified policy can be deployed across various embodiments for both wheeled and quadrupedal robots. X-Nav consists of two learning stages: 1) multiple expert policies are trained using deep reinforcement learning with privileged observations on a wide range of randomly generated robot embodiments; and 2) a single general policy is distilled from the expert policies via navigation action chunking with transformer (Nav-ACT). The general policy directly maps visual and proprioceptive observations to low-level control commands, enabling generalization to novel robot embodiments. Simulated experiments demonstrated that X-Nav achieved zero-shot transfer to both unseen embodiments and photorealistic environments. A scalability study showed that the performance of X-Nav improves when trained with an increasing number of randomly generated embodiments. An ablation study confirmed the design choices of X-Nav. Furthermore, real-world experiments were conducted to validate the generalizability of X-Nav in real-world environments.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".