// SOFTWARE · AUTONOMOUS POLICY TRAINING

Describe the task. Get a verified policy.

Our pipeline turns a task written in plain English and a digital model of your robot into a trained policy: the program that tells the robot how to move to get the job done. No expert hand-tunes it. Every result is graded on how often it succeeds in situations it never practiced, never on its own internal score.

Measured in simulation, on conditions held out from training.

95% Pick-and-place success on situations never seen in training, two-finger gripper
0 Reward settings tuned by hand
~1 day To set up a new two-finger gripper
2 Grippers through the same pipeline

// Simulation results in NVIDIA Isaac Lab. The second gripper trained with domain randomization: friction, stiffness and sensor noise varied on every attempt. 95% is measured with training randomness switched off, at approach distances the policy never trained at. Testing on real robots is the next milestone.

A search over rewards, judged by measurement.

A robot learns a skill by trial and error, with a reward formula scoring every attempt. Writing that formula is the slow, expert part of training, and our loop writes, tests and revises it on its own. A person sets the task and the bar. The system does the iterations.

  1. Task in English

    "Grip the block squarely, carry it low over the bin, set it down, then let go." That sentence plus a digital model of your robot is the whole input.

    Input
  2. Generate rewards

    An AI language model writes candidate rewards, built from a library of scoring terms we have already tested. It is told every failure the system has already seen.

    LLM · Eureka method
  3. Gate before training

    Quick checks, taking milliseconds to minutes, reject a broken reward before it can waste an hour of GPU time.

    Cheapest check first
  4. Train in parallel

    Thousands of simulated robots practice at once on each GPU, the graphics chip that runs the simulation, with several candidate rewards and random starting points running side by side. Runs that stall or fall apart are stopped automatically.

    NVIDIA Isaac Lab
  5. Grade on held-out conditions

    Each policy is retested at distances and settings it never trained on. That success rate, not the reward score, decides the ranking.

    Measured success
  6. Diagnose the failure

    Every failed attempt gets a category: never gripped, dropped on the way, stopped short, released too high. The dominant failure picks the next fix.

    Failure catalog
  7. Advance the curriculum

    Training is staged like a lesson plan: pick, then carry, then place. Each stage starts from the last stage's winner, and moves on only after it clears its own bar.

    Staged training
  8. Verified policy out

    You get the policy, its success rate under each held-out condition, and footage. The measurement is part of what you receive.

    Deliverable

Steps 02–06 repeat until the policy clears the bar or the system reports it is stuck, with the reason. No one watches the dashboards.

  • PPick
  • TCarry
  • APlace
  • B–CWider approaches
  • NNoise down: steady, repeatable motion

Every reward is checked before it reaches a GPU.

Each check runs before the next, more expensive one. The first gate tests the task itself: a hand-scripted reference motion has to succeed in every condition, and the success test has to reject drops, throws and a gripper that never lets go. A task has to be solvable before any reward search begins.

~5 min, onceEnvironment gateThe task is solvable, and the success test cannot be gamed
MillisecondsReward spec checkOnly tested terms, with valid settings
~1 secondReward regression suiteEach term rewards the right behavior, and a wrong grip earns nothing
SecondsScripted-attempt rankingA correct attempt must outscore a drop, a swat or never releasing
~1 hour GPUTraining plus held-out gradingOnly what passed everything above

Have a picking, kitting or machine-loading task?Phase 1 is ready now: we can train and verify a policy for your gripper and part in simulation.

Tell us the task →

We grade every policy on conditions it never trained on.

Held-out grading measures what a policy will do on the parts and positions it meets next. A policy scored on its own training conditions is partly scored on memory: in one of our own placing runs, the top policy succeeded 91% of the time under training conditions and 43% under held-out ones. Ranking on the first number would have shipped the wrong policy.

91% Same policy, training conditions
43% Same policy, held-out conditions: the number we rank on

// Placing stage, prototype gripper, simulation. The system then kept training until the policy, with training randomness switched off, reached 95% on held-out conditions.

Every failure becomes a rule the next search starts with.

When a run fails in a new way, the cause is written into a failure catalog with its evidence and the safeguard that now prevents it. Every future reward search reads that catalog. A fix made once applies to every policy after it, on every robot.

One recent example: a carry reward paid an off-center grip almost as well as a good one, so the policy traded grip quality for speed. The fix was not a new weight. It was a rule: carry pay starts only after the grip passes the success test's own check. That rule now applies to every task the system trains.

What changes for an automation team.

Typical hand-tuned trainingMK2 pipeline
RewardWritten and re-tuned by an expert, per taskGenerated, gated and revised automatically
RankingReward curves and a person's judgmentMeasured success on held-out conditions
FailuresRediscovered on the next projectCataloged, and checked on every future run
SupervisionSomeone watches every runRuns stop, advance or report stuck on their own
What you receiveA saved model fileA policy, its numbers per condition, and footage
New gripperStart overAbout a day of setup; same task, same checks

From trained policies to the pipeline in your hands.

Every number on this page is from simulation, and the bridge to real robots is already going in: domain randomization, which varies friction, motor stiffness and sensor noise on every practice attempt, so a policy cannot rely on one perfect simulated world. Real hardware is what comes next.

Can your robot cell be our first real-world test?A gripper, an arm and a concrete task are all it takes.

Pre-order request →

How we grade a grasp policy.

The blog covers why we rank on held-out conditions, and what the failure catalog caught on its way to a 95% pick-and-place policy.

Help us get it on real hardware.

Tell us the gripper, the part and what success looks like. We will reply with how we would train it and how we would measure it, in simulation now and in your cell next.

Email us →