ASPIRE's own paper confirms it evaluates the same three LIBERO-Pro perturbation suites CoDA compares against, with a qualitatively consistent Object-suite-strongest pattern, but its published numbers do not reconcile with CoDA's specific percentage-point margins

roboticsvision-language-actionaspirelibero-procodacorroborationarxivunverified-quant

CoDA (arXiv:2610.22362, 2026) credits ASPIRE as the strongest external baseline on LIBERO-Pro, reporting that its own model "exceeds ASPIRE [18] by 7 and 9 percentage points overall, achieving the highest success on the Goal and Spatial suites under both perturbations, while ASPIRE remains strongest on the Object suite" (per claim-coda-co-evolution-raises-ood-manipulation-success-beyond-baselines-and-on-libero-pro). An independent, primary read of ASPIRE's own paper (Lu, Wu, Kou, Fu, Xiao, Mandlekar, Xu, Shi, Goldberg, Chen, Chowdhury, Zhu, Fan & Wang — NVIDIA, University of Michigan, UIUC, UC Berkeley, and CMU, arXiv:2607.00272, June 2026 — no author overlap with CoDA) confirms ASPIRE is a real system that evaluates on "LIBERO-Pro [Zhou et al., 2025] for short-horizon robustness under object, goal, and spatial perturbations" — the same three suite names CoDA's comparison uses.

ASPIRE's own reported gains over its baselines are concentrated on the Object suite: "On LIBERO-Pro, Aspire improves over all the baselines on all three suites: averaging the Pos and Task perturbation axes, Aspire gains 77% on Object, 41.5% on Goal, and 42.5% on Spatial over the strongest baseline in each suite." That Object-suite-strongest pattern is qualitatively consistent with CoDA's claim that "ASPIRE remains strongest on the Object suite" — independent cross-paper consistency, though ASPIRE (published roughly four months before CoDA) could not have compared itself against CoDA directly. But ASPIRE's own text reports results along "Pos" and "Task" perturbation axes, not the "position" and "instruction" axes CoDA's comparison names, and nothing in ASPIRE's own extracted text matches or disconfirms CoDA's specific 7-and-9-percentage-point margin over it.

The suite-pattern consistency is confirmed; the specific margin figures remain [unverified-quant — needs primary], sourced only to CoDA's self-reported comparison. See question-corroborate-coda-2026-arxiv-2610-22362-single-source-cap.