docs(recipes): compact language recipe comments

This commit is contained in:
Pepijn
2026-07-15 15:08:20 +02:00
parent 2e43ca0d54
commit ffdd87fdac
3 changed files with 15 additions and 97 deletions
+3 -17
View File
@@ -1,15 +1,5 @@
# subtask — subtask + action blend, no memory.
#
# Same as subtask_mem but with the memory_update sub-recipe dropped, so
# the model only learns:
#
# high_level_subtask — predict the subtask from the task.
# low_level_execution — flow loss with [images, subtask, state].
#
# No persistent high-level state (no memory note, no plan): the prompt is
# just the task / subtask. Requires the dataset to carry `subtask`
# annotations; samples whose `if_present` bindings are missing don't
# render.
# Predicts subtasks from tasks and trains subtask-conditioned action flow without memory or plans.
# Requires `subtask` annotations; samples with missing `if_present` bindings do not render.
blend:
@@ -22,9 +12,5 @@ blend:
low_level_execution:
weight: 0.70
messages:
# The action expert is conditioned on the SUBTASK — at inference
# `HighLevelSubtaskFwd` generates it via the LM head and feeds it
# here. `stream: low_level` flips `predict_actions=True` so the
# flow loss fires; no text-CE target (subtask prediction is owned
# by `high_level_subtask`).
# The low-level stream trains action flow on the generated or annotated subtask.
- {role: user, content: "${subtask}", stream: low_level, if_present: subtask}
+5 -31
View File
@@ -1,17 +1,5 @@
# subtask_mem — compact Hi-Robot blend with memory.
#
# Trains the core subtask + action objectives and memory updates:
#
# high_level_subtask — predict the subtask from the task.
# low_level_execution — flow loss with [images, subtask, state].
# memory_update — compress progress into a memory note.
#
# Plan is intentionally left out — memory is the only persistent
# high-level state here, keeping the prompt short.
#
# Requires the dataset to carry `subtask` and `memory` annotations.
# Sub-recipes whose `if_present` bindings are missing simply don't
# render for that sample.
# Trains subtask prediction, subtask-conditioned action flow, and memory updates without plans.
# Requires `subtask` and `memory`; missing `if_present` bindings skip the affected sub-recipe.
blend:
@@ -24,26 +12,12 @@ blend:
low_level_execution:
weight: 0.60
messages:
# The action expert is conditioned on the SUBTASK — at inference
# `HighLevelSubtaskFwd` generates it via the LM head and feeds it
# here. `stream: low_level` flips `predict_actions=True` so the
# flow loss fires; no text-CE target (subtask prediction is owned
# by `high_level_subtask`).
# The low-level stream trains action flow on the generated or annotated subtask.
- {role: user, content: "${subtask}", stream: low_level, if_present: subtask}
memory_update:
# At inference, `MemoryUpdateFwd` is triggered only on
# `subtask_change` events (sparse). Training densely with
# `active_at` — i.e. on every frame inside a subtask interval,
# not just the boundary frame — supervises the same
# (prior_memory, completed_subtask) → current_memory mapping
# against varied observations within the interval. The model
# learns a stateless transformation; the *when* to emit lives in
# the inference trigger, not the model. Annotations only exist
# for ~1% of frames as boundary events, so `emitted_at` would
# waste 99% of the blend draws (and silently leak them into a
# task-conditioned fallback); `active_at` lifts the renderable
# rate to ~87% on this dataset.
# `active_at` densifies sparse boundaries while preserving the prior-memory/subtask mapping.
# Inference controls update timing through `subtask_change` events.
weight: 0.15
bindings:
prior_memory: "nth_prev(style=memory, offset=1)"
@@ -1,28 +1,5 @@
# subtask_mem_vqa_speech — Hi-Robot blend + memory + spoken responses.
#
# Extends the compact subtask_mem recipe with VQA and spoken interjection responses:
#
# high_level_subtask — predict the subtask from the task.
# low_level_execution — flow loss with [images, subtask, state].
# memory_update — compress progress into a memory note.
# user_interjection_response — reply to a user interjection with a
# spoken `say` tool call (no plan, no
# subtask text — just the spoken reply).
# ask_vqa_{top,wrist} — camera-grounded VQA.
#
# Plan is intentionally left out — memory is the only persistent
# high-level state here, keeping the prompt short.
#
# Requires the dataset to carry `memory`, `interjection` and `say`-tool
# annotations (the annotation pipeline's memory + interjection modules)
# in addition to `subtask` and `vqa`. Sub-recipes whose `if_present`
# bindings are missing simply don't render for that sample, so a
# dataset without interjections still trains the rest of the blend.
#
# Tool-call note: the `say` tool call on the interjection-response turn
# is flattened to a `<say>...</say>` text marker by the tokenizer step
# (`_flatten_say_tool_calls`) so the LM head learns to emit exactly the
# marker the runtime parses back (`_split_plan_and_say`).
# Adds memory, spoken interjection responses, and camera-grounded VQA to subtask/action training.
# Missing optional annotations skip only their sub-recipe; `say` tool calls tokenize as `<say>...</say>`.
blend:
@@ -35,26 +12,12 @@ blend:
low_level_execution:
weight: 0.40
messages:
# The action expert is conditioned on the SUBTASK — at inference
# `HighLevelSubtaskFwd` generates it via the LM head and feeds it
# here. `stream: low_level` flips `predict_actions=True` so the
# flow loss fires; no text-CE target (subtask prediction is owned
# by `high_level_subtask`).
# The low-level stream trains action flow on the generated or annotated subtask.
- {role: user, content: "${subtask}", stream: low_level, if_present: subtask}
memory_update:
# At inference, `MemoryUpdateFwd` is triggered only on
# `subtask_change` events (sparse). Training densely with
# `active_at` — i.e. on every frame inside a subtask interval,
# not just the boundary frame — supervises the same
# (prior_memory, completed_subtask) → current_memory mapping
# against varied observations within the interval. The model
# learns a stateless transformation; the *when* to emit lives in
# the inference trigger, not the model. Annotations only exist
# for ~1% of frames as boundary events, so `emitted_at` would
# waste 99% of the blend draws (and silently leak them into the
# task-conditioned fallback); `active_at` lifts the renderable
# rate to ~87% on Hi-Robot-style datasets.
# `active_at` densifies sparse boundaries while preserving the prior-memory/subtask mapping.
# Inference controls update timing through `subtask_change` events.
weight: 0.10
bindings:
prior_memory: "nth_prev(style=memory, offset=1)"
@@ -74,15 +37,10 @@ blend:
messages:
- {role: user, content: "${task}", stream: high_level}
- {role: user, content: "${interjection}", stream: high_level, if_present: interjection}
# Spoken reply only: the assistant turn carries no text content,
# just a `say` tool call (`tool_calls_from: speech`). The chat
# tokenizer flattens it to a `<say>...</say>` marker, so the
# supervised target trains the model to respond to an
# interjection with a spoken acknowledgement.
# The assistant target is a `say` tool call flattened to a `<say>...</say>` marker.
- {role: assistant, stream: high_level, target: true, if_present: speech, tool_calls_from: speech}
# VQA is view-dependent — each camera gets its own sub-recipe so the
# resolver disambiguates via `camera=...`. Adjust camera keys to your dataset.
# Each camera uses a separate VQA sub-recipe for view-specific binding.
ask_vqa_top:
weight: 0.075
bindings: