RoboTwin 2.0
Bimanual Aloha-AgileX sim: 50 tasks, policies trained on 50 clean demos per task, 100 trials each in clean and domain-randomized scenes.
Official board: team retrained 17 of 22 entries via XPolicyLab. Clean track crowding (top 89.58%), randomized top 68.12%. Self-reported paper numbers (~86-94%, larger demo budget) are saturated and not comparable.
In the authors’ words
Simulation-based data synthesis has emerged as a powerful paradigm for advancing real-world robotic manipulation. Yet existing datasets remain insufficient for robust bimanual manipulation due to (1) the lack of scalable task generation methods and (2) oversimplified simulation environments. We present RoboTwin 2.0, a scalable framework for automated, large-scale generation of diverse and realistic data, together with unified evaluation protocols for dual-arm manipulation. At its core is RoboTwin-OD, an object library of 731 instances across 147 categories with semantic and manipulation-relevant annotations. Building on this, we design an expert data synthesis pipeline that leverages multimodal language models (MLLMs) and simulation-in-the-loop refinement to automatically generate task-level execution code. To improve sim-to-real transfer, RoboTwin 2.0 applies structured domain randomization along five axes: clutter, lighting, background, tabletop height, and language, enhancing data diversity and policy robustness. The framework is instantiated across 50 dual-arm tasks and five robot embodiments. Empirically, it yields a 10.9% gain in code generation success rate. For downstream policy learning, a VLA model trained with synthetic data plus only 10 real demonstrations achieves a 367% relative improvement over the 10-demo baseline, while zero-shot models trained solely on synthetic data obtain a 228% gain. These results highlight the effectiveness of RoboTwin 2.0 in strengthening sim-to-real transfer and robustness to environmental variations. We release the data generator, benchmark, dataset, and code to support scalable research in robust bimanual manipulation. Project Page: https://robotwin-platform.github.io/, Code: https://github.com/robotwin-Platform/robotwin/.
- Level
- Everyday Most adults, without training
- Scored
- Checked automatically A program checks the result against an answer key, unit tests or the expected final state.
- Answers
- Agent task Many steps in a terminal, browser, desktop, app, game or robot.
GO-3 Nano Preview tops the leaderboard with 85%
Best score per entry from the benchmark's own leaderboard, read on 2 Nov 2026. Where a model ran with several settings or harnesses, we keep its best. Names in gray aren't in our model list: fine-tunes, agent systems, products and older models. They don't count toward leaders. The best model we track is π0.5, at 58.3%.
- 85.0 GO-3 Nano Preview
- 83.7 PrismWAM*
- 82.7 PICA-WAM
- 82.0 CloudRobo-WM
- 79.5 MWA-Phoenix
- 79.1 PatchWAM
- 78.8 ME-Dex-1.0
- 77.1 EWAM
- 74.5 ViGAR
- 71.3 UniWAM
- 70.6 PrismWAM
- 67.4 GigaBrain-0.7
- 64.5 WorldLA
- 61.7 WorldScape Policy 2.0
- 61.6 4D-WAM
- 58.3 π0.5
- 58.3 OLA-Geo
- 52.0 Spatial Forcing
- 47.9 X-WAM
- 44.5 X-VLA
- 43.9 Abot-M0
- 40.7 EventVLA
- 40.5 Xiaomi Robotics-0
- 39.8 FastWAM
- 37.7 GalaxeaVLA
- 35.3 Discrete Forcing
- 33.8 AHA-WAM
- 31.4 π0
- 30.1 DP3
- 24.8 starVLA
- 24.1 RDT
- 15.7 ACT
- 14.3 DP
- 1 GO-3 Nano Preview cotrain 85%
- 2 PrismWAM* cotrain 83.7%
- 3 PICA-WAM cotrain 82.7%
- 4 CloudRobo-WM cotrain 82%
- 5 MWA-Phoenix cotrain 79.5%
- 6 PatchWAM cotrain 79.1%
- 7 ME-Dex-1.0 cotrain 78.8%
- 8 EWAM cotrain 77.1%
- 9 ViGAR cotrain 74.5%
- 10 UniWAM cotrain 71.3%
- 11 PrismWAM cotrain 70.6%
- 12 GigaBrain-0.7 cotrain 67.4%
- 13 WorldLA cotrain 64.5%
- 14 WorldScape Policy 2.0 cotrain 61.7%
- 15 4D-WAM cotrain 61.6%
- 16 π0.5 cotrain 58.3%
- 17 OLA-Geo cotrain 58.3%
- 18 Spatial Forcing cotrain 52%
- 19 X-WAM cotrain 47.9%
- 20 X-VLA cotrain 44.5%
- 21 Abot-M0 cotrain 43.9%
- 22 EventVLA cotrain 40.7%
- 23 Xiaomi Robotics-0 cotrain 40.5%
- 24 FastWAM cotrain 39.8%
- 25 GalaxeaVLA cotrain 37.7%
- 26 Discrete Forcing cotrain 35.3%
- 27 AHA-WAM cotrain 33.8%
- 28 π0 sft 31.4%
- 29 DP3 sft 30.1%
- 30 starVLA cotrain 24.8%
- 31 RDT sft 24.1%
- 32 ACT sft 15.7%
- 33 DP sft 14.3%
| # | Entry | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | GO-3 Nano Preview | 85% | cotrain | Oct 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 2 | PrismWAM* | 83.7% | cotrain | Oct 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 3 | PICA-WAM | 82.7% | cotrain | Oct 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 4 | CloudRobo-WM | 82% | cotrain | Oct 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 5 | MWA-Phoenix | 79.5% | cotrain | Oct 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 6 | PatchWAM | 79.1% | cotrain | Oct 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 7 | ME-Dex-1.0 | 78.8% | cotrain | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 8 | EWAM | 77.1% | cotrain | Oct 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 9 | ViGAR | 74.5% | cotrain | Oct 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 10 | UniWAM | 71.3% | cotrain | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 11 | PrismWAM | 70.6% | cotrain | Oct 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 12 | GigaBrain-0.7 | 67.4% | cotrain | Aug 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 13 | WorldLA | 64.5% | cotrain | Oct 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 14 | WorldScape Policy 2.0 | 61.7% | cotrain | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 15 | 4D-WAM | 61.6% | cotrain | Aug 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 16 | π0.5 | 58.3% | cotrain | Apr 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 17 | OLA-Geo | 58.3% | cotrain | Sep 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 18 | Spatial Forcing | 52% | cotrain | Aug 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 19 | X-WAM | 47.9% | cotrain | Aug 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 20 | X-VLA | 44.5% | cotrain | Aug 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 21 | Abot-M0 | 43.9% | cotrain | Aug 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 22 | EventVLA | 40.7% | cotrain | Aug 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 23 | Xiaomi Robotics-0 | 40.5% | cotrain | Aug 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 24 | FastWAM | 39.8% | cotrain | Aug 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 25 | GalaxeaVLA | 37.7% | cotrain | Aug 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 26 | Discrete Forcing | 35.3% | cotrain | Oct 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 27 | AHA-WAM | 33.8% | cotrain | Aug 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 28 | π0 | 31.4% | sft | Oct 2024 | Official leaderboard |
| 29 | DP3 | 30.1% | sft | Aug 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 30 | starVLA | 24.8% | cotrain | Aug 2026 | Official leaderboard |
| 31 | RDT | 24.1% | sft | Aug 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 32 | ACT | 15.7% | sft | Aug 2025 | Official leaderboard |
| 33 | DP | 14.3% | sft | Aug 2025 | Official leaderboard |
Scores over time
All the scores we have, one dot each, so a model tested at several settings appears more than once.
No lab model card reports it yet
We read the headline results of 479 launch posts from 51 labs, and none of them list this benchmark.
Versions
More in Robotics
- ERQA In use 400 multiple-choice visual questions from robot and egocentric footage on spatial, trajectory, action and state reasoning. Accuracy.
Gemini Robotics ER 2 78.5%
- RoboLab In use Zero-shot DROID Franka policies in Isaac Lab on 120 tabletop tasks at three instruction levels, 10 episodes each. Success rate.
GR00T N1.7 8.58%
- Human proximity (Google DeepMind robotics) In use Models judge from robot camera views whether a human is within 1 meter, a spatial awareness check for safe robot behavior. Scored by accuracy.
Gemini Robotics ER 2 93%
- Moment finding (Google DeepMind) In use Models find the moment in a robot video when an event happens. Scored by accuracy and mean absolute time distance in seconds.
Gemini Robotics ER 2 91.3%
- Progress classification (Google DeepMind) In use Models assign each frame of a robot video to one of five task-progress bands from 0 to 100 percent. Scored by accuracy.
Gemini Robotics ER 2 57.4%
- LIBERO Fading Simulated Franka tabletop tasks in four 10-task suites. Policies fine-tuned on 50 demos per task. Success rate over ~50 trials.
MolmoAct 2 97.2%