Search arXiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2404.07569

Can Vehicle Motion Planning Generalize to Realistic Long-tail Scenarios?

Marcel Hallgarten·Julian Zapata·Martin Stoll·Katrin Renz·Andreas Zell
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Real-world autonomous driving systems must make safe decisions in the face of rare and diverse traffic scenarios. Current state-of-the-art planners are mostly evaluated on real-world datasets like nuScenes (open-loop) or nuPlan (closed-loop). In particular, nuPlan seems to be an expressive evaluation method since it is based on real-world data and closed-loop, yet it mostly covers basic driving scenarios. This makes it difficult to judge a planner's capabilities to generalize to rarely-seen situations. Therefore, we propose a novel closed-loop benchmark interPlan containing several edge cases and challenging driving scenarios. We assess existing state-of-the-art planners on our benchmark and show that neither rule-based nor learning-based planners can safely navigate the interPlan scenarios. A recently evolving direction is the usage of foundation models like large language models (LLM) to handle generalization. We evaluate an LLM-only planner and introduce a novel hybrid planner that combines an LLM-based behavior planner with a rule-based motion planner that achieves state-of-the-art performance on our benchmark.

Explore related subjects

cs.ROcs.AIcs.LG

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Marcel Hallgarten, Julian Zapata, Martin Stoll, Katrin Renz, Andreas Zell. 2024-04-11. Can Vehicle Motion Planning Generalize to Realistic Long-tail Scenarios?. https://arxiv.org/abs/2404.07569

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

IMLE-VLA: Fast Single-Step Action Generation for Vision-Language-Action Policies

Vision-language-action (VLA) policies leverage pretrained vision-language backbones to achieve strong cross-task generalization. A leading design couples this backbone with a dedicated continuous action head trained via diffusion or flow matching. However, such heads rely on iterative multi-step sampling, for example 10 Euler steps in $\pi_{0.5}$. This creates an inference bottleneck that produces stop-and-go movement in the robot and slower task completion. We introduce IMLE-VLA, which replaces the iterative action head with a single-step conditional generator trained via conditional Implicit Maximum Likelihood Estimation (cIMLE). The cIMLE objective promotes multimodal action coverage, avoiding the mode collapse of naive regression heads while eliminating multi-step sampling entirely. When IMLE-VLA is applied to $\pi_{0.5}$, it increases inference frequency 3.67x (55 Hz vs. 15 Hz), enabling up to 11x higher action throughput. On the 40-task LIBERO benchmark, IMLE-VLA achieves the highest average success rate (98.0%) among all baselines while leading in inference frequency. Under the test-time perturbations of LIBERO-plus, IMLE-VLA retains $\pi_{0.5}$'s robustness while other baselines degrade sharply, confirming that the cIMLE head preserves generalization. Real-world experiments on a Franka Emika Panda across four tasks demonstrate smoother motion (2.2x to 3.0x lower jerk) and faster task completion, with IMLE-VLA outperforming $\pi_{0.5}$ on every task and reducing average VLA inference time per episode by 3.9x to 6.6x. Videos and code are available at https://kianhk6.github.io/IMLE-VLA/

cs.RO↗
arXiv2026

ObstaDiff: Generalizable Diffusion Policy Learning via Obstacle-aware Representations

Imitation learning has achieved impressive results in robotic manipulation, yet most existing approaches assume clean backgrounds and lack explicit mechanisms for obstacle-aware motion generation. Extending such policies to cluttered, real-world scenes with unstructured obstacles remains a key generalization challenge. We present ObstaDiff, a decomposed diffusion-policy framework with a lightweight obstacle-aware visual encoder. ObstaDiff extracts a structured target-obstacle-background representation, enabling the downstream alignment policy to generate end-effector trajectories toward a target-centered bottleneck pose while reasoning about surrounding obstacles. We evaluate ObstaDiff on 61 real-robot greenhouse trials per method (366 executions in total). ObstaDiff achieves 75.41% average task success and 8.20% average obstacle collision rate, outperforming representative imitation-learning baselines and improving generalization in cluttered agricultural scenes.

cs.RO↗
arXiv2026

Testing Between the Test Cases: Proving End-to-End Steering in Conditions You Never Drove

AI-based automated vehicle testing is challenging because a model that passes every test condition can still fail in the real world. Formal verification offers a way to directly address this gap. On a simulated highway and an arterial road we trained two small end-to-end steering networks each in CARLA, one on clear conditions alone and one on clear, fog, night and low sun. All four models were driven against a 2.19 ft lane-departure budget. Without driving again, we used bound propagation, a formal method that reads the trained weights, to compute how far steering can drift at every disturbance strength between two captured images. One calculation covers more than a campaign could drive: on the arterial it spans 133 poses, where ten intensities each would be 10^133 combinations, in minutes on one GPU. Not only did formal verification find conditions that broke the clear-trained policy without simulation testing, it provided some preliminary evidence for potential failures between the test cases. Our overall conclusion is that formal verification is a viable complement to simulation, and could be adopted as a part of verification and validation for automated driving.

cs.RO↗