REVIEW 2 cited by
A Comprehensive LLM-powered Framework for Driving Intelligence Evaluation
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
Evaluation methods for autonomous driving are crucial for algorithm optimization. However, due to the complexity of driving intelligence, there is currently no comprehensive evaluation method for the level of autonomous driving intelligence. In this paper, we propose an evaluation framework for driving behavior intelligence in complex traffic environments, aiming to fill this gap. We constructed a natural language evaluation dataset of human professional drivers and passengers through naturalistic driving experiments and post-driving behavior evaluation interviews. Based on this dataset, we developed an LLM-powered driving evaluation framework. The effectiveness of this framework was validated through simulated experiments in the CARLA urban traffic simulator and further corroborated by human assessment. Our research provides valuable insights for evaluating and designing more intelligent, human-like autonomous driving agents. The implementation details of the framework and detailed information about the dataset can be found at Github.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
A Survey on Evaluating Quality and Trustworthiness in LLM-Generated Data
A metric-oriented survey that classifies intrinsic quality and trustworthiness metrics for LLM-generated data across six modalities and documents systematic evaluation gaps in the current literature.
-
From Words to Collisions: LLM-Guided Evaluation and Adversarial Generation of Safety-Critical Driving Scenarios
An LLM with ego-centric prompts detects collisions and generates adversarial driving scenarios more reliably than Cartesian prompts, though validation of generation is limited.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.