Abstract
Early successes on agentic robotics point to a potential paradigm shift toward using coding agents to control robots. Existing robotics benchmarks are built around visuomotor policy learning, leaving it open whether coding agents can reliably control diverse robots under physical-world constraints. We therefore introduce the Embodied First Exam, a unified, comprehensive, and agent-native evaluation framework where coding agents can choose their own control approach: direct control, code to control, or train a policy to control. We hope it serves as a first exam for coding agents before they enter the physical world, with 1,156 tasks in 35 suites on 47 robots, including 9 new suites that go beyond pick-and-place to spatial puzzles, dexterous manipulation, multi-robot interaction, dynamic whole-body control, and sim-to-sim engineering. Each task can be run in up to three evaluation settings. The Standard Setting mimics the real world: the agent receives only sensor observations and, by default, cannot reset the environment. Its Realtime variant keeps the environment running while the agent reasons. The Privileged Setting gives the agent access to the full simulator state and unlimited resets, allowing it to search for an oracle solution for training purposes. Success rates in this setting serve as an approximate upper bound. On the 456 core tasks, the strongest of eight agents, GPT-6 Astra in Codex, achieves a success rate of 34% in the Standard Setting, leaving much room for improvement. To see where agents fail, we label the stage at which failed attempts go wrong and compare failures across agents, settings, and stage categories.
Community
Coding agents have started controlling robots, but most existing robotics benchmarks are designed for visuomotor policy learning, not for agents. We introduce Embodied First Exam, an agent-native benchmark where the agent decides how to control the robot:
- ๐น๏ธ Direct control
- ๐ป Write code to control it
- ๐ง Train a policy to control it
- Mixes, others ...
Scale: 1,156 tasks ยท 35 suites ยท 47 robots, including 9 new suites that go beyond pick-and-place: spatial puzzles, dexterous manipulation, multi-robot interaction, dynamic whole-body control, and sim-to-sim engineering.
Three evaluation settings:
- Standard: sensor observations only, no resets by default (closest to the real world)
- Realtime: the environment keeps running while the agent thinks โฑ๏ธ
- Privileged: full simulator state and unlimited resets, which gives an approximate upper bound
๐ Result: On the 456 core tasks, the best of 8 agents (GPT-6 Astra in Codex) reaches only 34% in the Standard Setting. There's a lot of room to improve.
๐ We also label the stage where each failed attempt goes wrong and compare failures across agents, settings, and stage categories.
๐ Paper: https://arxiv.org/html/2611.12177
๐ป Code: https://github.com/mll-lab-nu/embodied-first-exam
๐ Project page: https://embodied-first-exam.ai
Questions and feedback are welcome! ๐
Letting the coding agent choose between direct control, code, or training a policy is the part I find most interesting, because the choice itself becomes something you can grade. With 1,156 tasks across 35 suites, which of the three approaches did agents fall back on most when a task got hard?
Get this paper in your agent:
hf papers read 2611.12177 Don't have the latest CLI?
curl -LsSf https://hf.co/cli/install.sh | bash Models citing this paper 0
No model linking this paper
Datasets citing this paper 0
No dataset linking this paper
Spaces citing this paper 0
No Space linking this paper
Collections including this paper 0
No Collection including this paper