Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

RoboTron-Sim: Improving Real-World Driving via Simulated Hard-Case

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read RoboTron-Sim claims that training an MLLM planner on simulated hard cases generated in CARLA, with scenario-aware prompts and camera-geometry conditioning, improves real-world nuScenes open-loop planning by about half in hard scenarios.

desk verdict Missing table and ablations undercut the ~50% hard-scenario claim, but the HASS dataset and SPE/I2E adaptation recipe are solid enough for serious peer review. read the letter →

arxiv 2508.04642 v1 pith:7KWCO7KB submitted 2025-08-06 cs.RO cs.CV

Baihui Xiao , Chengjian Feng , Zhijian Huang , Feng yan , Yujie Zhong , Lin Ma This is my paper
classification cs.ROcs.CV
keywords autonomousdrivingmultimodallargelanguagemodelssim-to-realtransfersynthetichardcasesopen-loopplanningCARLAnuScenesend-to-end
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

RoboTron-Sim sets out to prove that rare, dangerous driving scenarios do not have to be collected in the real world to be learned: they can be synthesized in simulation and transferred to real-world planning. The paper builds HASS, a CARLA dataset of 47,553 samples spanning 13 high-risk edge-case categories with balanced day/night and sunny/rainy conditions, and trains a multimodal large language model (MLLM) planner on it together with real nuScenes data. To bridge the sim-to-real gap, it adds scenario-aware prompts that label data provenance and city, plus an Image-to-Ego encoder that feeds each camera's geometry into the model. On the nuScenes validation set, the method reports 48.1% lower L2 distance and 45.8% lower collision rate in hard-to-drive scenarios in open-loop planning (trajectory prediction without a driving loop), while keeping routine-scenario performance. If this holds, synthetic data becomes a practical way to cover long-tail driving events without dangerous data collection.

What carries the argument

The engine is HASS (Hard-case Augmented Synthetic Scenarios), generated in CARLA with a Think2Drive teacher and a six-camera 900x1600 sensor suite: it balances day/night and sunny/rainy conditions and oversamples 13 long-tail edge-case categories so rare events dominate training. Two adapters carry the Sim2Real argument: Scenario-aware Prompt Engineering (SPE) prepends data-provenance and city tokens so the LLM can treat simulated and real inputs differently, and the Image-to-Ego (I2E) encoder, a two-layer MLP, maps each camera's image-to-ego transformation into embeddings that normalize sensor geometry across domains. The supporting piece is coordinate alignment: CARLA's left-handed frame w

What would settle it

Run a controlled nuScenes experiment with three training sets: real data only, real data plus HASS, and real data plus HASS with the SPE provenance token removed or the I2E encoder disabled. If hard-scenario L2 distance and collision rate do not improve in the second condition over the first, or if removing either adapter does not degrade the result, the paper's claim that simulated hard cases and the proposed alignment mechanisms drive the gain is falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that an MLLM can learn transferable real-world driving skills from simulated hard cases, provided the data is balanced and the model is told how to interpret the simulation. HASS supplies the data: 13 procedurally generated long-tail categories (jaywalking pedestrians, sudden cut-ins, near-collision events) plus routine hard-to-drive cases, built in CARLA by a Think2Drive teacher with a six-camera rig and aligned to nuScenes coordinates. On the model side, Scenario-aware Prompt Engineering tells the LLM whether the input is simulated or real and which city it is in, so its commonsense knowledge can adapt the policy; the Image-to-Ego Encoder injects per-view camer

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the HASS scenarios generated in CARLA by the Think2Drive teacher approximate the visual and behavioral diversity of real-world nuScenes hard cases closely enough that a model given only categorical provenance prompts and camera-geometry conditioning can transfer what it learns; if that representativeness fails, the reported gains may reflect dataset statistics rather than genuine sim-to-real transfer.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The 13 HASS edge-case categories can be generated at scale, making rare-event coverage a data-generation problem rather than a data-collection problem.
  • Because the I2E encoder consumes camera parameters directly, planners trained this way should transfer across different sensor rigs without retraining on each camera setup.
  • Balanced environmental sampling (58.65% day/41.35% night, 48.38% sunny/51.61% rainy) gives the model exposure to conditions that are underrepresented in real datasets.
  • RoboTron-Sim outperforms prior MLLM planners and traditional planners on open-loop planning on nuScenes, including on collision and boundary metrics.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The recipe could become a closed loop: mine failures from a real-world validation set, synthesize matching CARLA scenarios, retrain, and repeat, making edge-case coverage an iterative process rather than a static dataset.
  • The success of categorical provenance prompts suggests that simulator photorealism may matter less than explicit metadata; a quantitative version of this idea would condition on measured domain similarity instead of city labels.
  • If the open-loop gains reflect genuine behavioral transfer, closed-loop evaluation on the same hard scenarios should show corresponding improvements in safety-critical metrics.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes RoboTron-Sim, a multimodal large language model (MLLM) based planning framework that augments real-world nuScenes training data with a CARLA-generated synthetic dataset, HASS, containing 13 hard-case and long-tail scenario categories. Two components are introduced: Scenario-aware Prompt Engineering (SPE), which conditions the model on data provenance (simulation/real) and geographic context, and an Image-to-Ego (I2E) Encoder, which injects camera intrinsic/extrinsic geometry. The model is evaluated on nuScenes open-loop planning, and the paper claims roughly 50% improvement in hard scenarios (48.1% L2, 45.8% collision) over baselines, plus state-of-the-art overall performance.

Significance. If the claims hold, the paper would make a useful contribution by demonstrating that carefully curated simulated hard cases can transfer to real-world MLLM driving, and the SPE/I2E components are well-motivated and clearly described. The HASS dataset and generation pipeline are concrete assets. However, the headline result is not currently verifiable from the submitted manuscript: the supporting table is absent, the hard-scenario evaluation protocol is undefined, and no ablation isolates the contribution of HASS from the extra data volume or the new architectural modules. The claimed 50% improvement is not reflected in the overall nuScenes table, which shows smaller average gains.

major comments (4)
  1. [Abstract; Sec. 1 (contributions); Table 3] The central claim—'~50% improvement' in hard scenarios, specified as 48.1% L2 and 45.8% collision improvements—is not supported by any table in the submitted text. Table 2, which would presumably contain these numbers, is missing entirely. Table 3 reports only overall nuScenes metrics, where RoboTron-Sim improves over OmniDrive by about 33% in L2 (0.84 vs 0.56) and 38% in collision (0.94 vs 0.58) without ego pose, and 30% and 13% with ego pose—not the stated 50%. The 'hard scenarios' evaluation subset is never defined: no selection criteria, sample size, or per-category breakdown. Please restore Table 2 (or an equivalent) and define the hard-scenario subset precisely.
  2. [Sec. 4.1.1; Sec. 3.2] No ablation isolates the contribution of HASS. RoboTron-Sim is trained on 28,130 nuScenes + 47,553 HASS samples (Sec. 4.1.1). The only control mentioned is VAD with mixed data, which gains ~1% L2 in HD scenarios (Sec. 3.2); there is no RoboTron-Sim trained without HASS, nor a variant trained on an equal-sized synthetic dataset without hard-case composition, nor ablations removing SPE/I2E. Consequently, the observed gains could stem from the MLLM backbone, the extra training data volume, SPE, or I2E rather than from the specifically hard-case content. Please provide ablations that separate these factors, e.g., nuScenes-only, nuScenes + equal-sized non-hard synthetic data, and nuScenes + HASS without SPE/I2E.
  3. [Sec. 4.1.1; Sec. 4.1.2] The evaluation protocol is incomplete in the manuscript. Both the dataset description and the metric details are deferred with 'Please refer to the supplementary material for more details,' but the supplementary material is not part of the reviewed manuscript. Without the hard-scenario definition, the trajectory-frequency details, and the exact evaluation split, the reported numbers cannot be reproduced or independently checked. Please include the full protocol in the main text or make the supplementary available for review.
  4. [General; Table 3] No error bars, confidence intervals, or statistical significance tests are reported for any metric. Since the hard-scenario subset is likely small, the claimed 48.1%/45.8% improvements may be based on a handful of scenarios. Please report the number of evaluation scenarios in the hard subset and, if possible, variance across multiple training seeds or by bootstrapping over scenes.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Throughout] Typographical issues: 'V AD' and 'LLaV A-OneVision' appear with inconsistent spacing throughout the text and figures; please standardize to 'VAD' and 'LLaVA-OneVision'.
  2. [References] Reference [22] duplicates [12] (same title/venue), and reference [26] appears twice with different page ranges. Please deduplicate and unify citation entries.
  3. [Table 1] The caption should state that 'Real Scenario' refers to nuScenes and 'Simulated Scenario' to HASS, and clarify whether the counts include both E2D and H2D subsets. This would aid readability.
  4. [Sec. 1, contributions] The claim of being the 'first in-depth investigation' is difficult to verify and unnecessary; please soften to avoid an unsubstantiated novelty assertion.
  5. [Discussion/Limitations] The paper lacks a limitations and future-work section. In particular, it should discuss the absence of closed-loop evaluation, the open-loop-only nature of the nuScenes benchmark, and potential biases in the hard-scenario selection.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity found: the central claim rests on external nuScenes benchmark evaluation, not on a fitted input or self-citation chain; missing hard-scenario table is an evidence gap, not circularity.

full rationale

Walking the paper's derivation chain, the key components are: (1) generation of simulated HASS data using CARLA and Think2Drive; (2) an MLLM baseline with SPE prompts and an I2E encoder; (3) training on 28,130 real nuScenes samples plus 47,553 simulated HASS samples; and (4) evaluation on the nuScenes validation set via L2 distance, collision rate, and boundary violation rate. None of these steps reduces a claimed prediction to its own input by construction. The I2E encoder is a trainable MLP adapter that consumes camera intrinsics/extrinsics; it is not a fitted parameter later renamed as a prediction. SPE is an input-prompt design, not a fitted quantity. The model is trained on nuScenes and evaluated on a held-out nuScenes validation split, so the reported overall metrics are genuine external-benchmark measurements. The paper's self-citations (DriveMM, RoboMM, P3Nav, RDA-Driver) appear in related-work context and are not load-bearing for the central Sim2Real claim; no uniqueness theorem from the authors is invoked to force the architecture. The main weakness is evidentiary, not circular: Table 2, which supposedly supports the ~50% hard-scenario improvement, is absent from the manuscript, and the criterion for selecting 'hard scenarios' in evaluation is not defined in the provided text. That means the strongest claim is currently unverifiable, but unverifiability due to missing tables or undefined subsets is a reproducibility/correctness concern, not circularity. Therefore the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new physical entities or forces are introduced. The free parameters are the training data mix and dataset composition, both chosen by hand. The axioms are the domain assumptions about simulation fidelity, MLLM transferability, and evaluation validity, all load-bearing for the central claim.

free parameters (2)
  • real:sim training data ratio = 28,130 real nuScenes samples, 47,553 synthetic HASS samples
    The ratio is chosen by the authors without a reported sweep or sensitivity analysis. It directly affects the training distribution and the measured improvement, so it is a design choice that the central claim depends on.
  • HASS scenario composition (13 categories, weather/lighting balance) = 58.65% day, 41.35% night; 48.38% sunny, 51.61% rainy; 53.58% turn scenarios
    The dataset composition is hand-designed to address perceived real-world imbalances. There is no evidence that these proportions are optimal or that the specific categories cover the relevant long-tail distribution.
assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption CARLA simulation with Think2Drive as a teacher generates scenarios whose visual and behavioral content is representative enough of real-world nuScenes hard cases for transfer to work.
    This premise is required for the entire Sim2Real claim. It is asserted in Section 3.1.2 and not validated directly (e.g., via closed-loop or perceptual similarity analysis).
  • domain assumption A multimodal LLM can learn transferable driving policies from synthetic images when given categorical domain prompts (simulated/real, city name) and camera geometry via a small MLP adapter.
    Section 3.2 states that MLLMs have generalization ability that enables cross-domain transfer, but this is an assumption about model behavior, not a proven property.
  • domain assumption Open-loop planning metrics on the nuScenes validation set (L2 distance, collision rate, boundary violation rate) are meaningful proxies for real-world driving competence.
    The paper uses these metrics following BEV-Planner, but open-loop evaluation is known to be weakly correlated with closed-loop driving performance. The significance of the results depends on this assumption.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of RoboTron-Sim: Improving Real-World Driving via Simulated Hard-Case." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/7KWCO7KB

@misc{pith2026250804642,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: RoboTron-Sim: Improving Real-World Driving via Simulated Hard-Case},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/7KWCO7KB}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.04642}
}
read the original abstract

Collecting real-world data for rare high-risk scenarios, long-tailed driving events, and complex interactions remains challenging, leading to poor performance of existing autonomous driving systems in these critical situations. In this paper, we propose RoboTron-Sim that improves real-world driving in critical situations by utilizing simulated hard cases. First, we develop a simulated dataset called Hard-case Augmented Synthetic Scenarios (HASS), which covers 13 high-risk edge-case categories, as well as balanced environmental conditions such as day/night and sunny/rainy. Second, we introduce Scenario-aware Prompt Engineering (SPE) and an Image-to-Ego Encoder (I2E Encoder) to enable multimodal large language models to effectively learn real-world challenging driving skills from HASS, via adapting to environmental deviations and hardware differences between real-world and simulated scenarios. Extensive experiments on nuScenes show that RoboTron-Sim improves driving performance in challenging scenarios by around 50%, achieving state-of-the-art results in real-world open-loop planning. Qualitative results further demonstrate the effectiveness of RoboTron-Sim in better managing rare high-risk driving scenarios. Project page: https://stars79689.github.io/RoboTron-Sim/

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. OmniNWM: Omniscient Driving Navigation World Models

    cs.CV 2025-10 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    OmniNWM jointly generates long panoramic multi-modal driving videos, controls them precisely via normalized Plücker ray-maps, and derives dense driving rewards from generated 3D occupancy.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

48 extracted references · 31 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Planning-oriented au- tonomous driving,

    Y . Hu, J. Yang, L. Chen, K. Li, C. Sima, X. Zhu, S. Chai, S. Du, T. Lin, W. Wanget al., “Planning-oriented au- tonomous driving,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF confer- ence on computer vision and pattern recognition, 2023, pp. 17 853–17 862. 1, 2, 6

    work page 2023

  2. [2]

    Rethinking the open-loop evaluation of end-to-end autonomous driving in nuscenes,

    J.-T. Zhai, Z. Feng, J. Du, Y . Mao, J.-J. Liu, Z. Tan, Y . Zhang, X. Ye, and J. Wang, “Rethinking the open-loop evaluation of end-to-end autonomous driving in nuscenes,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.10430, 2023. 6

    arXiv 2023

  3. [3]

    Is ego status all you need for open-loop end-to-end au- tonomous driving?

    Z. Li, Z. Yu, S. Lan, J. Li, J. Kautz, T. Lu, and J. M. Alvarez, “Is ego status all you need for open-loop end-to-end au- tonomous driving?” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Con- ference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2024, pp. 14 864–14 873. 1, 6, 11

    work page 2024

  4. [4]

    Emma: End- to-end multimodal model for autonomous driving,

    J.-J. Hwang, R. Xu, H. Lin, W.-C. Hung, J. Ji, K. Choi, D. Huang, T. He, P. Covington, B. Sappet al., “Emma: End- to-end multimodal model for autonomous driving,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.23262, 2024. 6

    arXiv 2024

  5. [5]

    Visual instruction tuning,

    H. Liu, C. Li, Q. Wu, and Y . J. Lee, “Visual instruction tuning,”Advances in neural information processing systems, vol. 36, pp. 34 892–34 916, 2023. 6

    work page 2023

  6. [6]

    Vicuna: An open-source chatbot impressing gpt-4 with 90%* chatgpt quality, march 2023,

    W.-L. Chiang, Z. Li, Z. Lin, Y . Sheng, Z. Wu, H. Zhang, L. Zheng, S. Zhuang, Y . Zhuang, J. E. Gonzalezet al., “Vicuna: An open-source chatbot impressing gpt-4 with 90%* chatgpt quality, march 2023,”URL https://lmsys. org/blog/2023-03-30-vicuna, vol. 3, no. 5, 2023. 6

    work page 2023

  7. [7]

    Merlin: Empowering mul- timodal llms with foresight minds,

    E. Yu, L. Zhao, Y . Wei, J. Yang, D. Wu, L. Kong, H. Wei, T. Wang, Z. Ge, X. Zhanget al., “Merlin: Empowering mul- timodal llms with foresight minds,” inEuropean Conference on Computer Vision. Springer, 2024, pp. 425–443. 6

    work page 2024

  8. [8]

    Think2drive: Efficient reinforcement learning by thinking with latent world model for autonomous driving (in carla-v2),

    Q. Liet al., “Think2drive: Efficient reinforcement learning by thinking with latent world model for autonomous driving (in carla-v2),” inEuropean Conference on Computer Vision. Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland, 2024. 3

    work page 2024

Show all 48 references
  1. [9]

    nuscenes: A multimodal dataset for autonomous driving,

    H. Caesar, V . Bankiti, A. H. Lang, S. V ora, V . E. Li- ong, Q. Xu, A. Krishnan, Y . Pan, G. Baldan, and O. Bei- jbom, “nuscenes: A multimodal dataset for autonomous driving,” inIEEE Conf. Comput. Vis. Pattern Recog., 2020, pp. 11 621–11 631. 1, 6, 11

    2020

  2. [10]

    Carla: An open urban driving simulator,

    A. Dosovitskiy, G. Ros, F. Codevilla, A. Lopez, and V . Koltun, “Carla: An open urban driving simulator,” inCon- ference on robot learning. PMLR, 2017, pp. 1–16. 2, 3, 6, 11

    2017

  3. [11]

    Airsim: High- fidelity visual and physical simulation for autonomous ve- hicles,

    S. Shah, D. Dey, C. Lovett, and A. Kapoor, “Airsim: High- fidelity visual and physical simulation for autonomous ve- hicles,” inField and Service Robotics: Results of the 11th International Conference. Springer, 2018, pp. 621–635. 2

    2018

  4. [12]

    Making large language models better plan- ners with reasoning-decision alignment,

    Z. Huang, T. Tang, S. Chen, S. Lin, Z. Jie, L. Ma, G. Wang, and X. Liang, “Making large language models better plan- ners with reasoning-decision alignment,” inEuropean Con- ference on Computer Vision. Springer, 2024, pp. 73–90. 2

    2024

  5. [13]

    Senna: Bridging large vision-language models and end-to-end autonomous driv- ing,

    B. Jiang, S. Chen, B. Liao, X. Zhang, W. Yin, Q. Zhang, C. Huang, W. Liu, and X. Wang, “Senna: Bridging large vision-language models and end-to-end autonomous driv- ing,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.22313, 2024. 2

    2024 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Llava-onevision: Easy visual task transfer,

    B. Li, Y . Zhang, D. Guo, R. Zhang, F. Li, H. Zhang, K. Zhang, P. Zhang, Y . Li, Z. Liuet al., “Llava-onevision: Easy visual task transfer,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.03326,

    arXiv

  7. [15]

    Automated evaluation of large vision-language models on self-driving corner cases,

    Y . Li, W. Zhang, K. Chen, Y . Liu, P. Li, R. Gao, L. Hong, M. Tian, X. Zhao, Z. Liet al., “Automated evaluation of large vision-language models on self-driving corner cases,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.10595, 2024. 1

    2024 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Lingoqa: Video question answering for autonomous driving,

    A.-M. Marcu, L. Chen, J. H ¨unermann, A. Karnsund, B. Han- otte, P. Chidananda, S. Nair, V . Badrinarayanan, A. Kendall, J. Shottonet al., “Lingoqa: Video question answering for autonomous driving,” inEur. Conf. Comput. Vis., 2024

    2024

  9. [17]

    Holistic autonomous driving understanding by bird’s-eye- view injected multi-modal large models,

    X. Ding, J. Han, H. Xu, X. Liang, W. Zhang, and X. Li, “Holistic autonomous driving understanding by bird’s-eye- view injected multi-modal large models,” inIEEE Conf. Comput. Vis. Pattern Recog., 2024, pp. 13 668–13 677. 1

    2024

  10. [18]

    Drivevlm: The convergence of autonomous driving and large vision-language models,

    X. Tian, J. Gu, B. Li, Y . Liu, Y . Wang, Z. Zhao, K. Zhan, P. Jia, X. Lang, and H. Zhao, “Drivevlm: The convergence of autonomous driving and large vision-language models,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.12289, 2024. 2

    2024 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Gpt-4 technical report,

    J. Achiam, S. Adler, S. Agarwal, L. Ahmad, I. Akkaya, F. L. Aleman, D. Almeida, J. Altenschmidt, S. Altman, S. Anadkatet al., “Gpt-4 technical report,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.08774, 2023. 1

    2023 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Dilu: A knowledge-driven approach to autonomous driving with large language models,

    L. Wen, D. Fu, X. Li, X. Cai, T. Ma, P. Cai, M. Dou, B. Shi, L. He, and Y . Qiao, “Dilu: A knowledge-driven approach to autonomous driving with large language models,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.16292, 2023. 1

    2023 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Drivegpt4: Interpretable end-to-end au- tonomous driving via large language model,

    Z. Xu, Y . Zhang, E. Xie, Z. Zhao, Y . Guo, K.-Y . K. Wong, Z. Li, and H. Zhao, “Drivegpt4: Interpretable end-to-end au- tonomous driving via large language model,”IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, 2024

    2024

  14. [22]

    Making large language models better plan- ners with reasoning-decision alignment,

    Z. Huang, T. Tang, S. Chen, S. Lin, Z. Jie, L. Ma, G. Wang, and X. Liang, “Making large language models better plan- ners with reasoning-decision alignment,” inEuropean Con- ference on Computer Vision. Springer, 2025, pp. 73–90. 1

    2025

  15. [23]

    Drive as you speak: Enabling human-like interaction with large lan- guage models in autonomous vehicles,

    C. Cui, Y . Ma, X. Cao, W. Ye, and Z. Wang, “Drive as you speak: Enabling human-like interaction with large lan- guage models in autonomous vehicles,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision, 2024, pp. 902–909

    2024

  16. [24]

    Lmdrive: Closed-loop end-to-end driving with large language models,

    H. Shao, Y . Hu, L. Wang, G. Song, S. L. Waslander, Y . Liu, and H. Li, “Lmdrive: Closed-loop end-to-end driving with large language models,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2024, pp. 15 120–15 130. 1, 2

    2024

  17. [25]

    Omnidrive: A holistic llm- agent framework for autonomous driving with 3d perception, reasoning and planning,

    S. Wang, Z. Yu, X. Jiang, S. Lan, M. Shi, N. Chang, J. Kautz, Y . Li, and J. M. Alvarez, “Omnidrive: A holistic llm- agent framework for autonomous driving with 3d perception, reasoning and planning,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.01533,

    arXiv

  18. [26]

    Visual instruction tuning,

    H. Liu, C. Li, Q. Wu, and Y . J. Lee, “Visual instruction tuning,”Advances in neural information processing systems, vol. 36, 2024. 2

    2024

  19. [28]

    End-to-end autonomous driving: Challenges and frontiers,

    L. Chen, P. Wu, K. Chitta, B. Jaeger, A. Geiger, and H. Li, “End-to-end autonomous driving: Challenges and frontiers,” IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelli- gence, 2024

    2024

  20. [29]

    A survey on the memory mecha- nism of large language model based agents,

    Z. Zhang, X. Bo, C. Ma, R. Li, X. Chen, Q. Dai, J. Zhu, Z. Dong, and J.-R. Wen, “A survey on the memory mecha- nism of large language model based agents,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.13501, 2024. 1

    2024 arXiv

  21. [30]

    Bevdet: High-performance multi-camera 3d object detection in bird- eye-view,

    J. Huang, G. Huang, Z. Zhu, Y . Ye, and D. Du, “Bevdet: High-performance multi-camera 3d object detection in bird- eye-view,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2112.11790, 2021. 1

    2021 arXiv

  22. [31]

    Bevfusion: A simple and robust lidar-camera fusion framework,

    T. Liang, H. Xie, K. Yu, Z. Xia, Z. Lin, Y . Wang, T. Tang, B. Wang, and Z. Tang, “Bevfusion: A simple and robust lidar-camera fusion framework,”Advances in Neural In- formation Processing Systems, vol. 35, pp. 10 421–10 434, 2022

    2022

  23. [32]

    Bevfusion: Multi-task multi-sensor fusion with unified bird’s-eye view representation,

    Z. Liu, H. Tang, A. Amini, X. Yang, H. Mao, D. L. Rus, and S. Han, “Bevfusion: Multi-task multi-sensor fusion with unified bird’s-eye view representation,” in2023 IEEE in- ternational conference on robotics and automation (ICRA). IEEE, 2023, pp. 2774–2781. 1

    2023

  24. [33]

    Vip3d: End-to-end visual trajectory prediction via 3d agent queries,

    J. Gu, C. Hu, T. Zhang, X. Chen, Y . Wang, Y . Wang, and H. Zhao, “Vip3d: End-to-end visual trajectory prediction via 3d agent queries,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Confer- ence on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2023, pp. 5496–5506. 1

    2023

  25. [34]

    Vectornet: Encoding hd maps and agent dy- namics from vectorized representation,

    J. Gao, C. Sun, H. Zhao, Y . Shen, D. Anguelov, C. Li, and C. Schmid, “Vectornet: Encoding hd maps and agent dy- namics from vectorized representation,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 2020, pp. 11 525–11 533

    2020

  26. [35]

    Path-aware graph attention for hd maps in motion prediction,

    F. Da and Y . Zhang, “Path-aware graph attention for hd maps in motion prediction,” in2022 International conference on robotics and automation (ICRA). IEEE, 2022, pp. 6430–

    2022

  27. [36]

    Urban driver: Learning to drive from real-world demonstrations using policy gradients,

    O. Scheel, L. Bergamini, M. Wolczyk, B. Osi´nski, and P. On- druska, “Urban driver: Learning to drive from real-world demonstrations using policy gradients,” inConference on Robot Learning. PMLR, 2022, pp. 718–728. 1

    2022

  28. [37]

    Perceive, predict, and plan: Safe motion planning through interpretable semantic representations,

    A. Sadat, S. Casas, M. Ren, X. Wu, P. Dhawan, and R. Ur- tasun, “Perceive, predict, and plan: Safe motion planning through interpretable semantic representations,” inCom- puter Vision–ECCV 2020: 16th European Conference, Glas- gow, UK, August 23–28, 2020, Proceedings, Part XXI...

    2020

  29. [38]

    Cola-hrl: Continuous-lattice hier- archical reinforcement learning for autonomous driving,

    L. Gao, Z. Gu, C. Qiu, L. Lei, S. E. Li, S. Zheng, W. Jing, and J. Chen, “Cola-hrl: Continuous-lattice hier- archical reinforcement learning for autonomous driving,” in2022 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS). IEEE, 2022, pp. 13 143– 13 150. 1

    2022

  30. [39]

    Llm4drive: A survey of large language models for autonomous driving,

    Z. Yang, X. Jia, H. Li, and J. Yan, “Llm4drive: A survey of large language models for autonomous driving,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.01043, 2023. 1

    2023 arXiv

  31. [40]

    Language models are few-shot learners,

    T. Brown, B. Mann, N. Ryder, M. Subbiah, J. D. Kaplan, P. Dhariwal, A. Neelakantan, P. Shyam, G. Sastry, A. Askell et al., “Language models are few-shot learners,”Advances in neural information processing systems, vol. 33, pp. 1877– 1901, 2020. 1

    1901

  32. [41]

    Policy pre-training for autonomous driving via self-supervised ge- ometric modeling,

    P. Wu, L. Chen, H. Li, X. Jia, J. Yan, and Y . Qiao, “Policy pre-training for autonomous driving via self-supervised ge- ometric modeling,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2301.01006, 2023. 1

    2023 arXiv

  33. [42]

    Bench2drive: Towards multi-ability benchmarking of closed-loop end-to- end autonomous driving,

    X. Jia, Z. Yang, Q. Li, Z. Zhang, and J. Yan, “Bench2drive: Towards multi-ability benchmarking of closed-loop end-to- end autonomous driving,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.03877,

    arXiv

  34. [43]

    Oasis: Open agent social interaction simulations with one million agents,

    Z. Yang, Z. Zhang, Z. Zheng, Y . Jiang, Z. Gan, Z. Wang, Z. Ling, J. Chen, M. Ma, B. Dong,et al., “Oasis: Open agent social interaction simulations with one million agents,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.11581, 2024. 2

    2024 arXiv

  35. [44]

    Scalability in perception for autonomous driving: Waymo open dataset,

    P. Sun, H. Kretzschmar, X. Dotiwalla, A. Chouard, V . Pat- naik, P. Tsui, J. Guo, Y . Zhou, Y . Chai, B. Caineet al., “Scalability in perception for autonomous driving: Waymo open dataset,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 20...

    2020

  36. [45]

    Auton- omy 2.0: Why is self-driving always 5 years away?

    A. Jain, L. Del Pero, H. Grimmett, and P. Ondruska, “Auton- omy 2.0: Why is self-driving always 5 years away?”arXiv preprint arXiv:2107.08142, 2021. 1

    2021 arXiv

  37. [46]

    Drivemm: All-in-one large mul- timodal model for autonomous driving,

    Z. Huang, C. Feng, F. Yan, B. Xiao, Z. Jie, Y . Zhong, X. Liang, and L. Ma, “Drivemm: All-in-one large mul- timodal model for autonomous driving,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.07689, 2024. 2

    2024 arXiv

  38. [47]

    Robomm: All-in-one multimodal large model for robotic manipulation,

    F. Yan, F. Liu, L. Zheng, Y . Zhong, Y . Huang, Z. Guan, C. Feng, and L. Ma, “Robomm: All-in-one multimodal large model for robotic manipulation,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.07215, 2024. 2

    2024

  39. [48]

    P3nav: A unified framework for embodied navigation inte- grating perception, planning, and prediction,

    Y . Zhong, C. Feng, F. Yan, F. Liu, L. Zheng, and L. Ma, “P3nav: A unified framework for embodied navigation inte- grating perception, planning, and prediction,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.18525, 2025. 2

    2025 arXiv

  40. [49]

    Vad: Vector- ized scene representation for efficient autonomous driving,

    B. Jiang, S. Chen, Q. Xu, B. Liao, J. Chen, H. Zhou, Q. Zhang, W. Liu, C. Huang, and X. Wang, “Vad: Vector- ized scene representation for efficient autonomous driving,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, 2023, pp. 8340–8350. 1, 2, 4, 6, ...

    2023

Pith tools

Reviewed August 5, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.