Downloads · 30 days
0
junbrro/egopi-ab2x2-w0p03
egopi-ab2x2-w0p03 is a robotics model from junbrro. Use it for the robotics task on the model card, and read the license before you ship it in a product. The card lists the license as other.
Four checkpoints from a controlled 2×2 factorial study. All four arms share identical code, data, seed, batch size, and step count. Exactly two binary switches differ between them.
Downloads · 30 days
0
Access
Public
Updated Aug 27, 2026
Repo size
42 GB
Likes
0
Public
Click a slice to open those files.
.safetensors55.3 GB · 100%
From the Hugging Face model README
Four checkpoints from a controlled 2×2 factorial study. All four arms share identical code, data, seed, batch size, and step count. Exactly two binary switches differ between them.
| Arm | Cognitive alignment (hlinca256) | Action-latent tokenizer (w0p03) |
|---|---|---|
N | ✗ | ✗ |
A | ✓ | ✗ |
B | ✗ | ✓ |
AB | ✓ | ✓ |
Cognitive alignment (A axis). Grounds the vision-language cognitive tokens in the robot's physical space through a 256-hidden-unit adapter with a linear latent-alignment head and a 24-dimensional fingertip target (weight 0.2).
Action-latent tokenizer (B axis). Uses an action tokenizer trained with VICReg regression
weight 0.03 (embodreg_vicreg_w0p03), which reduces the human↔robot action-latent gap. When
this switch is on, the flow-matching target is the aligned latent z rather than the native
{p, r, q} representation.
lm_head (0.630B) + action model / MSAT (1.245B trainable)| Arm | Final train loss | Runtime | Tensors in index |
|---|---|---|---|
N | 0.0379 | 9h46m | 722 |
A | 0.0248 | 10h39m | 729 (+7) |
B | 0.5379 | 9h55m | 724 (+2) |
AB | 0.4557 | 10h48m | 731 (+9) |
Parameter counts are exactly additive across the two axes (722 + 7 + 2 = 731), confirming the two switches are structurally orthogonal.
Loss is only comparable within a tokenizer setting. The B axis replaces the flow-matching
target, so N/A and B/AB optimize different quantities. Comparing 0.0248 against 0.4557
says nothing about relative model quality.
Valid within-axis comparisons:
N → A: 0.0379 → 0.0248 (cognitive alignment, −35%)B → AB: 0.5379 → 0.4557 (cognitive alignment, −15%)Cognitive alignment lowers training loss under both tokenizer settings, which is a consistent signal — but training loss alone does not establish improved policy performance. Cross-axis comparison requires downstream evaluation.
Each arm folder holds final weights only — no optimizer state, no RNG state, no intermediate checkpoints.
<arm>/
├── config.json
├── model-0000{1,2,3}-of-00003.safetensors
├── model.safetensors.index.json
├── training_args.bin
├── processor/
└── experiment_cfg/