pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2604.15308 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-16 · 💻 cs.CV

Recognition: unknown

RAD-2: Scaling Reinforcement Learning in a Generator-Discriminator Framework

Hao Gao , Shaoyu Chen , Yifan Zhu , Yuehao Song , Wenyu Liu , Qian Zhang , Xinggang Wang
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 11:37 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.CV
keywords reinforcement learningdiffusion modelsautonomous drivingmotion planninggenerator-discriminatorclosed-loop planningBEV simulation
0
0 comments X

The pith

A diffusion generator paired with an RL discriminator reranks trajectories to cut closed-loop collisions by 56 percent.

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

The paper establishes that pure imitation learning leaves diffusion planners vulnerable to stochastic instabilities and missing negative feedback in interactive driving. RAD-2 decouples generation of diverse candidates from their long-term quality assessment by training an RL discriminator on closed-loop signals. This separation lets the system apply reinforcement learning without directly optimizing sparse rewards over the full high-dimensional trajectory space. New components for temporally consistent policy optimization and on-policy generator adjustment further stabilize training. The result is a planner that maintains multimodal uncertainty modeling while gaining corrective feedback.

Core claim

RAD-2 shows that a diffusion-based generator can produce trajectory candidates while an RL-optimized discriminator reranks them according to long-term driving quality, avoiding direct sparse reward application to the high-dimensional space and thereby improving optimization stability in closed-loop autonomous driving.

What carries the argument

The decoupled generator-discriminator architecture in which the discriminator uses reinforcement learning to score and rerank candidates from the diffusion generator.

If this is right

  • On-policy generator optimization converts closed-loop feedback into structured signals that shift the generator toward higher-reward trajectory manifolds.
  • Temporally consistent group relative policy optimization reduces credit-assignment problems when selecting among temporally coherent candidates.
  • BEV-Warp simulation enables high-throughput closed-loop evaluation directly in feature space, supporting large-scale training.
  • The same generator can be progressively improved without retraining the entire planner from scratch each time.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The separation of generation and evaluation may allow the same discriminator to be reused across different generators or even different driving domains.
  • If the discriminator generalizes, it could provide a route to incorporate sparse real-world feedback without full trajectory-level reward engineering.
  • The approach suggests that other multimodal planners facing credit assignment issues could adopt similar reranking stages.

Load-bearing premise

The RL discriminator can reliably judge long-term trajectory quality from closed-loop signals without creating new instabilities or requiring direct sparse rewards on the full trajectory space.

What would settle it

A side-by-side closed-loop test in which the same diffusion generator is run with and without the RL discriminator, measuring whether collision rates remain at least 50 percent lower when the discriminator is present.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.15308 by Hao Gao, Qian Zhang, Shaoyu Chen, Wenyu Liu, Xinggang Wang, Yifan Zhu, Yuehao Song.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Scaling RL in a Generator-Discriminator frame￾work. (a) Stabilizing RL Optimization: RAD-2 projects the high￾dim trajectory space into low-dim score and longitudinal com￾ponents, ensuring stable policy updates. (b) Efficient Simula￾tion: BEV-Warp enables high-throughput, feature-level closed￾loop training, overcoming the limitations of existing simulators. this purpose [3, 19, 47]. Regression-based planner… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: The comparison of multimodal trajectory planning paradigms. (a) Vocabulary-based scoring with fixed anchors [2, 30]. (b) Diffusion-based multimodal generation [36]. (c) RAD-2: synergizing diffusion generator with RL-discriminator in closed-loop training. lenges when applied to real-world autonomous driving. Real driving datasets contain noise and uneven distribu￾tion, which leads the diffusion model to lea… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Schematic of the BEV-Warp simulation environ￾ment. The closed-loop evaluation is driven by a recursive feature￾warping mechanism. At each timestep, a transformation matrix Mt is derived from the relative pose deviation between the simu￾lated agent Pt and the logged reference P ref t . This matrix is then applied to the reference BEV feature B ref t via spatial warping, syn￾thesizing a high-fidelity observa… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The RAD-2 training pipeline. Our approach synergizes a Diffusion-based generator G and a Transformer-based discriminator D within a multi-stage optimization loop: (a) Pre-training Stage: G is initialized via imitation learning to capture multi-modal trajectory priors from expert demonstrations. (b) Closed-loop Rollout: The joint policy, integrating G for generation and D for selection, interacts with the h… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Replay buffer management and closed-loop opti￾mization workflow. Driving rollouts are archived in a FIFO re￾play buffer that maintains a curated balance between safety-critical (yellow) and efficiency-oriented (green) scenarios. The system employs an asynchronous dual-trigger optimization strategy: (i) the trajectory discriminator is updated upon each batch ingestion to maintain sensitivity to recent rollo… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Scaling behavior of training paradigms. Performance (defined as 2 × Safety@1 + EP@1.0) is evaluated against the cu￾mulative number of environment timesteps. The vertical dashed line marks the transition from on-policy generator optimization to discriminative optimization. creasing EP-Mean to 0.987. By jointly applying RL train￾ing to the discriminator and fine-tuning the generator, the proportion of feasib… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Training stability with and without clip filtering. Compared to the baseline (blue), clip filtering (orange) signifi￾cantly stabilizes training dynamics and improves performance by prioritizing more informative training signals [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Entropy stability analysis. The inclusion of H (purple) prevents a rapid decline in trajectory score entropy, maintaining a more diverse distribution for stable optimization compared to the baseline without regularization (blue). handle high-risk interactions. Conversely, Safety-oriented training prioritizes risk mitigation at the expense of effi￾ciency. These findings suggest that single-objective train￾i… view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Impact of scenario composition on closed-loop per￾formance. Compared to single-objective training (Safety-only or Efficiency-only), the Mixed strategy achieves a superior trade-off across all metrics. Models trained on biased subsets exhibit signif￾icant performance drops in complementary tasks (e.g., Efficiency￾only lacks safety robustness), highlighting the necessity of diverse scenario curation for bal… view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Qualitative comparison of closed-loop safety interaction. (1) Reference Input displays the front-view camera feed. (2) Baseline and (3) Ours each show the warped BEV input (left) and the corresponding perception and planning output (right). Starting from the same initial state at the Start Frame, the two models exhibit diverging behaviors as the interaction unfolds. By Keyframe 1, the Baseline fails to mi… view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Qualitative comparison of driving efficiency in dynamic traffic. (1) Reference Input displays the front-view camera feed. (2) Baseline and (3) Ours each show the warped BEV input (left) and the perception and planning output with Efficiency Progress (EP) (right). Starting from the same initial state, both models encounter a vehicle merging from the right at Keyframe 1. Despite sufficient clearance in the … view at source ↗
read the original abstract

High-level autonomous driving requires motion planners capable of modeling multimodal future uncertainties while remaining robust in closed-loop interactions. Although diffusion-based planners are effective at modeling complex trajectory distributions, they often suffer from stochastic instabilities and the lack of corrective negative feedback when trained purely with imitation learning. To address these issues, we propose RAD-2, a unified generator-discriminator framework for closed-loop planning. Specifically, a diffusion-based generator is used to produce diverse trajectory candidates, while an RL-optimized discriminator reranks these candidates according to their long-term driving quality. This decoupled design avoids directly applying sparse scalar rewards to the full high-dimensional trajectory space, thereby improving optimization stability. To further enhance reinforcement learning, we introduce Temporally Consistent Group Relative Policy Optimization, which exploits temporal coherence to alleviate the credit assignment problem. In addition, we propose On-policy Generator Optimization, which converts closed-loop feedback into structured longitudinal optimization signals and progressively shifts the generator toward high-reward trajectory manifolds. To support efficient large-scale training, we introduce BEV-Warp, a high-throughput simulation environment that performs closed-loop evaluation directly in Bird's-Eye View feature space via spatial warping. RAD-2 reduces the collision rate by 56% compared with strong diffusion-based planners. Real-world deployment further demonstrates improved perceived safety and driving smoothness in complex urban traffic.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes RAD-2, a unified generator-discriminator framework for closed-loop motion planning in autonomous driving. A diffusion-based generator produces diverse trajectory candidates while an RL-optimized discriminator reranks them using long-term quality signals; this decoupling is intended to avoid instabilities from direct sparse rewards on high-dimensional trajectories. Additional contributions include Temporally Consistent Group Relative Policy Optimization (TCG-RPO) for credit assignment, On-policy Generator Optimization to shift the generator toward high-reward manifolds, and BEV-Warp for high-throughput closed-loop simulation in BEV feature space. The central empirical claim is a 56% collision-rate reduction relative to strong diffusion-based planners, with qualitative real-world improvements in safety and smoothness.

Significance. If the reported collision reduction and stability gains hold under rigorous evaluation, the generator-discriminator decoupling could meaningfully advance imitation-learning-based diffusion planners by incorporating corrective long-term feedback without direct high-dimensional reward application. TCG-RPO and BEV-Warp address practical scaling issues in RL for sequential trajectory decisions and large-scale training, respectively. These elements would be of interest to the motion-planning community if accompanied by reproducible experimental evidence.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract (final sentence): The claim that RAD-2 'reduces the collision rate by 56% compared with strong diffusion-based planners' is presented without any reference to the experimental protocol, specific baselines, dataset splits, evaluation metrics, statistical significance, error bars, or ablation studies. Because this quantitative result is the primary evidence for the framework's effectiveness, its unsupported presentation is load-bearing for the central claim.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract (RL discriminator description): The assertion that the RL discriminator 'reranks these candidates according to their long-term driving quality' and 'avoids directly applying sparse scalar rewards to the full high-dimensional trajectory space' lacks any detail on reward design, how long-term signals are computed, or how instabilities are mitigated in practice. This is central to the claimed stability advantage and requires concrete specification.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The phrase 'strong diffusion-based planners' is undefined; the manuscript should explicitly name the comparison methods and their configurations.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract: Acronyms TCG-RPO and BEV-Warp are introduced without expansion on first use, which reduces immediate readability.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive and detailed feedback on our manuscript. We address each major comment point by point below, providing the strongest honest defense based on the content of the paper while indicating revisions where they improve clarity without misrepresenting our work.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract (final sentence): The claim that RAD-2 'reduces the collision rate by 56% compared with strong diffusion-based planners' is presented without any reference to the experimental protocol, specific baselines, dataset splits, evaluation metrics, statistical significance, error bars, or ablation studies. Because this quantitative result is the primary evidence for the framework's effectiveness, its unsupported presentation is load-bearing for the central claim.

    Authors: We acknowledge that abstracts must remain concise, yet the referee is correct that the central quantitative claim benefits from additional context. The full manuscript details the experimental protocol, baselines (specific diffusion-based planners), dataset splits, evaluation metrics (primarily collision rate in closed-loop settings), statistical significance, error bars, and ablation studies in Sections 4 and 5, including tables with quantitative comparisons. To address the concern directly, we have revised the abstract's final sentence to: 'RAD-2 reduces the collision rate by 56% compared with strong diffusion-based planners in closed-loop evaluations, with full protocol, baselines, metrics, and ablations reported in the experiments.' This maintains brevity while explicitly directing readers to the supporting evidence. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract (RL discriminator description): The assertion that the RL discriminator 'reranks these candidates according to their long-term driving quality' and 'avoids directly applying sparse scalar rewards to the full high-dimensional trajectory space' lacks any detail on reward design, how long-term signals are computed, or how instabilities are mitigated in practice. This is central to the claimed stability advantage and requires concrete specification.

    Authors: The abstract serves as a high-level overview, with the referee correctly noting that more specificity would strengthen the stability claim. The manuscript provides concrete details in Section 3.2 (RL Discriminator) and Section 3.3 (TCG-RPO): the reward design combines safety (collision penalties), comfort, and efficiency terms evaluated over multi-step closed-loop simulations; long-term signals are computed by rolling out trajectories in the BEV-Warp simulator; and instabilities are mitigated by the decoupled generator-discriminator structure plus temporally consistent group-relative optimization for credit assignment. We have revised the abstract to include a brief elaboration: 'an RL-optimized discriminator reranks these candidates according to their long-term driving quality, computed via simulated future trajectories, thereby avoiding direct application of sparse rewards to high-dimensional spaces.' Full mechanisms and mitigation strategies remain in the methods section. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in derivation chain

full rationale

The paper proposes an architectural framework combining a diffusion generator with an RL discriminator, plus new components (TCG-RPO for credit assignment, on-policy generator updates, and BEV-Warp simulation). These are presented as design choices with empirical validation via collision-rate reduction, not as a mathematical derivation that reduces to its own inputs by construction. No equations are shown that equate a claimed prediction or uniqueness result to a fitted parameter or self-citation. The central claim remains an empirical outcome of the decoupled generator-discriminator setup rather than a self-referential identity. The architecture is self-contained against external benchmarks and does not rely on load-bearing self-citations or ansatz smuggling for its core logic.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Only the abstract is available; no equations, hyperparameters, or background assumptions are stated, so the ledger cannot be populated with concrete entries.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5548 in / 1164 out tokens · 57945 ms · 2026-05-10T11:37:18.303502+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. Action Emergence from Streaming Intent

    cs.RO 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    A new VLA model called SI uses a four-step chain-of-thought to derive driving intent and applies it via classifier-free guidance to a flow-matching trajectory generator, showing competitive Waymo scores and intent-con...

  2. Action Emergence from Streaming Intent

    cs.RO 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Streaming Intent lets a VLA model derive driving intent via streamed chain-of-thought reasoning and use it to steer a flow-matching action head, yielding competitive Waymo scores plus intent-based trajectory control w...

  3. CRAFT: Counterfactual-to-Interactive Reinforcement Fine-Tuning for Driving Policies

    cs.LG 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    CRAFT is an on-policy RL fine-tuning framework that decomposes closed-loop policy gradients into a group-normalized counterfactual proxy plus residual correction from interaction events, achieving top closed-loop perf...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

67 extracted references · 44 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers · 18 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Lan- guage models are few-shot learners.Advances in neural in- formation processing systems, 33:1877–1901, 2020

    Tom Brown, Benjamin Mann, Nick Ryder, Melanie Sub- biah, Jared D Kaplan, Prafulla Dhariwal, Arvind Neelakan- tan, Pranav Shyam, Girish Sastry, Amanda Askell, et al. Lan- guage models are few-shot learners.Advances in neural in- formation processing systems, 33:1877–1901, 2020. 3

    1901

  2. [2]

    VADv2: End-to-End Vectorized Autonomous Driving via Probabilistic Planning

    Shaoyu Chen, Bo Jiang, Hao Gao, Bencheng Liao, Qing Xu, Qian Zhang, Chang Huang, Wenyu Liu, and Xinggang Reference Input Baseline Ours Start FrameKeyframe 1Keyframe 2 Ego Vehicle Ego Vehicle Ego Vehicle Ego Vehicle Ego Vehicle Ego Vehicle EP=0 EP=0.77 EP=1.01 EP=0 EP=0.75 EP=1.09 Figure 12.Qualitative comparison of driving efficiency in dynamic traffic.(1...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  3. [3]

    Transfuser: Imitation with transformer-based sensor fusion for autonomous driv- ing.IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine in- telligence, 45(11):12878–12895, 2022

    Kashyap Chitta, Aditya Prakash, Bernhard Jaeger, Zehao Yu, Katrin Renz, and Andreas Geiger. Transfuser: Imitation with transformer-based sensor fusion for autonomous driv- ing.IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine in- telligence, 45(11):12878–12895, 2022. 1, 8, 10

    2022

  4. [4]

    Carla: An open urban driv- ing simulator

    Alexey Dosovitskiy, German Ros, Felipe Codevilla, Anto- nio Lopez, and Vladlen Koltun. Carla: An open urban driv- ing simulator. InConference on robot learning, pages 1–16. PMLR, 2017. 2, 3

    2017

  5. [5]

    Resisting stochastic risks in diffusion planners with the trajectory ag- gregation tree.arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.17879, 2024

    Lang Feng, Pengjie Gu, Bo An, and Gang Pan. Resisting stochastic risks in diffusion planners with the trajectory ag- gregation tree.arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.17879, 2024. 2

    work page arXiv 2024

  6. [6]

    Minddrive: A vision-language-action model for autonomous driving via online reinforcement learning,

    Haoyu Fu, Diankun Zhang, Zongchuang Zhao, Jianfeng Cui, Hongwei Xie, Bing Wang, Guang Chen, Dingkang Liang, and Xiang Bai. Minddrive: A vision-language-action model for autonomous driving via online reinforcement learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.13636, 2025. 2

    work page arXiv 2025

  7. [7]

    Rad: Training an end-to-end driving policy via large-scale 3dgs-based reinforcement learning.arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.13144,

    Hao Gao, Shaoyu Chen, Bo Jiang, Bencheng Liao, Yiang Shi, Xiaoyang Guo, Yuechuan Pu, Haoran Yin, Xiangyu Li, Xinbang Zhang, et al. Rad: Training an end-to-end driv- ing policy via large-scale 3dgs-based reinforcement learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.13144, 2025. 2, 3, 8, 10

    work page arXiv 2025

  8. [8]

    DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via Reinforcement Learning

    Daya Guo, Dejian Yang, Haowei Zhang, Junxiao Song, Peiyi Wang, Qihao Zhu, Runxin Xu, Ruoyu Zhang, Shirong Ma, Xiao Bi, et al. Deepseek-r1: Incentivizing reasoning ca- pability in llms via reinforcement learning.arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.12948, 2025. 3

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  9. [9]

    ipad: Iterative proposal-centric end-to-end autonomous driving

    Ke Guo, Haochen Liu, Xiaojun Wu, Jia Pan, and Chen Lv. ipad: Iterative proposal-centric end-to-end autonomous driv- ing.arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.15111, 2025. 3

    work page arXiv 2025

  10. [10]

    Denoising dif- fusion probabilistic models.Advances in neural information processing systems, 33:6840–6851, 2020

    Jonathan Ho, Ajay Jain, and Pieter Abbeel. Denoising dif- fusion probabilistic models.Advances in neural information processing systems, 33:6840–6851, 2020. 4

    2020

  11. [11]

    GAIA-1: A Generative World Model for Autonomous Driving

    Anthony Hu, Lloyd Russell, Hudson Yeo, Zak Murez, George Fedoseev, Alex Kendall, Jamie Shotton, and Gian- luca Corrado. Gaia-1: A generative world model for au- tonomous driving.arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.17080, 2023. 4

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2023

  12. [12]

    Planning-oriented autonomous driving

    Yihan Hu, Jiazhi Yang, Li Chen, Keyu Li, Chonghao Sima, Xizhou Zhu, Siqi Chai, Senyao Du, Tianwei Lin, Wenhai Wang, et al. Planning-oriented autonomous driving. InPro- ceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 17853–17862, 2023. 1

    2023

  13. [13]

    Efficient deep reinforcement learning with imitative expert priors for au- tonomous driving.IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems, 34(10):7391–7403, 2022

    Zhiyu Huang, Jingda Wu, and Chen Lv. Efficient deep reinforcement learning with imitative expert priors for au- tonomous driving.IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems, 34(10):7391–7403, 2022. 2, 3

    2022

  14. [14]

    Spatial transformer networks.Advances in neural informa- tion processing systems, 28, 2015

    Max Jaderberg, Karen Simonyan, Andrew Zisserman, et al. Spatial transformer networks.Advances in neural informa- tion processing systems, 28, 2015. 5

    2015

  15. [15]

    OpenAI o1 System Card

    Aaron Jaech, Adam Kalai, Adam Lerer, Adam Richard- son, Ahmed El-Kishky, Aiden Low, Alec Helyar, Aleksander Madry, Alex Beutel, Alex Carney, et al. Openai o1 system card.arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.16720, 2024. 3

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  16. [16]

    Vad: Vectorized scene representa- tion for efficient autonomous driving

    Bo Jiang, Shaoyu Chen, Qing Xu, Bencheng Liao, Jiajie Chen, Helong Zhou, Qian Zhang, Wenyu Liu, Chang Huang, and Xinggang Wang. Vad: Vectorized scene representa- tion for efficient autonomous driving. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, pages 8340–8350, 2023. 1, 8, 10

    2023

  17. [17]

    Senna: Bridging Large Vision-Language Models and End-to-End Autonomous Driving

    Bo Jiang, Shaoyu Chen, Bencheng Liao, Xingyu Zhang, Wei Yin, Qian Zhang, Chang Huang, Wenyu Liu, and Xing- gang Wang. Senna: Bridging large vision-language mod- els and end-to-end autonomous driving.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.22313, 2024. 10

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2024

  18. [18]

    Alphadrive: Unleashing the power of vlms in autonomous driving via reinforcement learning and reason- ing.arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.07608, 2025

    Bo Jiang, Shaoyu Chen, Qian Zhang, Wenyu Liu, and Xing- gang Wang. Alphadrive: Unleashing the power of vlms in autonomous driving via reinforcement learning and reason- ing.arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.07608, 2025. 3

    work page arXiv 2025

  19. [19]

    Learning to drive in a day

    Alex Kendall, Jeffrey Hawke, David Janz, Przemyslaw Mazur, Daniele Reda, John-Mark Allen, Vinh-Dieu Lam, Alex Bewley, and Amar Shah. Learning to drive in a day. In2019 international conference on robotics and automation (ICRA), pages 8248–8254. IEEE, 2019. 1

    2019

  20. [20]

    3d gaussian splatting for real-time radiance field rendering.ACM Trans

    Bernhard Kerbl, Georgios Kopanas, Thomas Leimk ¨uhler, and George Drettakis. 3d gaussian splatting for real-time radiance field rendering.ACM Trans. Graph., 42(4):139–1,

  21. [21]

    Refining dif- fusion planner for reliable behavior synthesis by automatic detection of infeasible plans.Advances in Neural Informa- tion Processing Systems, 36:24223–24246, 2023

    Kyowoon Lee, Seongun Kim, and Jaesik Choi. Refining dif- fusion planner for reliable behavior synthesis by automatic detection of infeasible plans.Advances in Neural Informa- tion Processing Systems, 36:24223–24246, 2023. 2

    2023

  22. [22]

    Reinforcement Learning and Control as Probabilistic Inference: Tutorial and Review

    Sergey Levine. Reinforcement learning and control as prob- abilistic inference: Tutorial and review.arXiv preprint arXiv:1805.00909, 2018. 3

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2018

  23. [23]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.18313 (2025)

    Bohan Li, Zhuang Ma, Dalong Du, Baorui Peng, Zhujin Liang, Zhenqiang Liu, Chao Ma, Yueming Jin, Hao Zhao, Wenjun Zeng, et al. Omninwm: Omniscient driving naviga- tion world models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.18313, 2025. 2

    work page arXiv 2025

  24. [24]

    Hydra-mdp++: Advancing end-to-end driving via expert- guided hydra-distillation,

    Kailin Li, Zhenxin Li, Shiyi Lan, Yuan Xie, Zhizhong Zhang, Jiayi Liu, Zuxuan Wu, Zhiding Yu, and Jose M Alvarez. Hydra-mdp++: Advancing end-to-end driv- ing via expert-guided hydra-distillation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.12820, 2025. 1, 3

    work page arXiv 2025

  25. [25]

    Reinforcement Learning with Action Chunking

    Qiyang Li, Zhiyuan Zhou, and Sergey Levine. Rein- forcement learning with action chunking.arXiv preprint arXiv:2507.07969, 2025. 3

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2025

  26. [26]

    Back to Basics: Let Denoising Generative Models Denoise

    Tianhong Li and Kaiming He. Back to basics: Let denoising generative models denoise.arXiv preprint arXiv:2511.13720, 2025. 2

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2025

  27. [27]

    Iterative linear quadratic regulator design for nonlinear biological movement systems

    Weiwei Li and Emanuel Todorov. Iterative linear quadratic regulator design for nonlinear biological movement systems. InFirst International Conference on Informatics in Control, Automation and Robotics, pages 222–229. SciTePress, 2004. 5

    2004

  28. [28]

    End-to-end driving with online tra- jectory evaluation via bev world model.arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.01941, 2025

    Yingyan Li, Yuqi Wang, Yang Liu, Jiawei He, Lue Fan, and Zhaoxiang Zhang. End-to-end driving with online tra- jectory evaluation via bev world model.arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.01941, 2025. 4

    work page arXiv 2025

  29. [29]

    ReCogDrive: A Reinforced Cognitive Framework for End-to-End Autonomous Driving

    Yongkang Li, Kaixin Xiong, Xiangyu Guo, Fang Li, Sixu Yan, Gangwei Xu, Lijun Zhou, Long Chen, Haiyang Sun, Bing Wang, et al. Recogdrive: A reinforced cognitive frame- work for end-to-end autonomous driving.arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.08052, 2025. 2, 3

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2025

  30. [30]

    Hydra-MDP: End-to-end Multimodal Planning with Multi-target Hydra-Distillation

    Zhenxin Li, Kailin Li, Shihao Wang, Shiyi Lan, Zhiding Yu, Yishen Ji, Zhiqi Li, Ziyue Zhu, Jan Kautz, Zuxuan Wu, et al. Hydra-mdp: End-to-end multimodal planning with multi- target hydra-distillation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.06978,

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv

  31. [31]

    Zhiqi Li, Wenhai Wang, Hongyang Li, Enze Xie, Chong- hao Sima, Tong Lu, Qiao Yu, and Jifeng Dai. Bevformer: learning bird’s-eye-view representation from lidar-camera via spatiotemporal transformers.IEEE Transactions on Pat- tern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 47(3):2020–2036,

    2020

  32. [32]

    Ztrs: Zero-imitation end-to-end autonomous driving with trajectory scoring,

    Zhenxin Li, Wenhao Yao, Zi Wang, Xinglong Sun, Jingde Chen, Nadine Chang, Maying Shen, Jingyu Song, Zuxuan Wu, Shiyi Lan, et al. Ztrs: Zero-imitation end-to-end au- tonomous driving with trajectory scoring.arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.24108, 2025. 1

    work page arXiv 2025

  33. [33]

    Generalized trajectory scoring for end-to-end multimodal planning.arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.06664, 2025

    Zhenxin Li, Wenhao Yao, Zi Wang, Xinglong Sun, Joshua Chen, Nadine Chang, Maying Shen, Zuxuan Wu, Shiyi Lan, and Jose M Alvarez. Generalized trajectory scor- ing for end-to-end multimodal planning.arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.06664, 2025. 3

    work page arXiv 2025

  34. [34]

    Fine-tuning is Not Enough: A Parallel Framework for Collaborative Imitation and Reinforcement Learning in End-to-end Autonomous Driving

    Zhexi Lian, Haoran Wang, Xuerun Yan, Weimeng Lin, Xi- anhong Zhang, Yongyu Chen, and Jia Hu. Fine-tuning is not enough: A parallel framework for collaborative imita- tion and reinforcement learning in end-to-end autonomous driving.arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.13842, 2026. 3

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  35. [35]

    Cirl: Controllable imitative reinforcement learning for vision-based self-driving

    Xiaodan Liang, Tairui Wang, Luona Yang, and Eric Xing. Cirl: Controllable imitative reinforcement learning for vision-based self-driving. InProceedings of the European conference on computer vision (ECCV), pages 584–599,

  36. [36]

    Diffusiondrive: Truncated diffusion model for end-to-end autonomous driving

    Bencheng Liao, Shaoyu Chen, Haoran Yin, Bo Jiang, Cheng Wang, Sixu Yan, Xinbang Zhang, Xiangyu Li, Ying Zhang, Qian Zhang, et al. Diffusiondrive: Truncated diffusion model for end-to-end autonomous driving. InProceedings of the Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Conference, pages 12037–12047, 2025. 1, 2, 3

    2025

  37. [37]

    Continuous control with deep reinforcement learning

    Timothy P Lillicrap, Jonathan J Hunt, Alexander Pritzel, Nicolas Heess, Tom Erez, Yuval Tassa, David Silver, and Daan Wierstra. Continuous control with deep reinforcement learning.arXiv preprint arXiv:1509.02971, 2015. 2

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2015

  38. [38]

    Reinforced refinement with self-aware expansion for end-to-end autonomous driving.arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.09800,

    Haochen Liu, Tianyu Li, Haohan Yang, Li Chen, Caojun Wang, Ke Guo, Haochen Tian, Hongchen Li, Hongyang Li, and Chen Lv. Reinforced refinement with self-aware ex- pansion for end-to-end autonomous driving.arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.09800, 2025. 2, 3

    work page arXiv 2025

  39. [39]

    Imitation is not enough: Robustifying imitation with reinforcement learn- ing for challenging driving scenarios

    Yiren Lu, Justin Fu, George Tucker, Xinlei Pan, Eli Bron- stein, Rebecca Roelofs, Benjamin Sapp, Brandyn White, Aleksandra Faust, Shimon Whiteson, et al. Imitation is not enough: Robustifying imitation with reinforcement learn- ing for challenging driving scenarios. In2023 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), pages 7...

    2023

  40. [40]

    Recondreamer-rl: Enhancing reinforcement learning via diffusion-based scene reconstruction,

    Chaojun Ni, Guosheng Zhao, Xiaofeng Wang, Zheng Zhu, Wenkang Qin, Xinze Chen, Guanghong Jia, Guan Huang, and Wenjun Mei. Recondreamer-rl: Enhancing rein- forcement learning via diffusion-based scene reconstruction. arXiv preprint arXiv:2508.08170, 2025. 2, 3

    work page arXiv 2025

  41. [41]

    Lift, splat, shoot: Encoding images from arbitrary camera rigs by implicitly unprojecting to 3d

    Jonah Philion and Sanja Fidler. Lift, splat, shoot: Encoding images from arbitrary camera rigs by implicitly unprojecting to 3d. InEuropean conference on computer vision, pages 194–210. Springer, 2020. 4

    2020

  42. [42]

    Proximal Policy Optimization Algorithms

    John Schulman, Filip Wolski, Prafulla Dhariwal, Alec Rad- ford, and Oleg Klimov. Proximal policy optimization algo- rithms.arXiv preprint arXiv:1707.06347, 2017. 3

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  43. [43]

    Drivedpo: Policy learning via safety dpo for end-to-end autonomous driving.arXiv preprint arXiv:2509.17940, 2025

    Shuyao Shang, Yuntao Chen, Yuqi Wang, Yingyan Li, and Zhaoxiang Zhang. Drivedpo: Policy learning via safety dpo for end-to-end autonomous driving.arXiv preprint arXiv:2509.17940, 2025. 3

    work page arXiv 2025

  44. [44]

    DeepSeekMath: Pushing the Limits of Mathematical Reasoning in Open Language Models

    Zhihong Shao, Peiyi Wang, Qihao Zhu, Runxin Xu, Junxiao Song, Xiao Bi, Haowei Zhang, Mingchuan Zhang, YK Li, Yang Wu, et al. Deepseekmath: Pushing the limits of math- ematical reasoning in open language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.03300, 2024. 3

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  45. [45]

    Senna-2: Aligning vlm and end-to-end driving policy for consistent decision making and planning.arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.11219, 2026

    Yuehao Song, Shaoyu Chen, Hao Gao, Yifan Zhu, Weixiang Yue, Jialv Zou, Bo Jiang, Zihao Lu, Yu Wang, Qian Zhang, et al. Senna-2: Aligning vlm and end-to-end driving policy for consistent decision making and planning.arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.11219, 2026. 8, 10

    work page arXiv 2026

  46. [46]

    2603.29163 , archivePrefix =

    Wenchao Sun, Xuewu Lin, Keyu Chen, Zixiang Pei, Xiang Li, Yining Shi, and Sifa Zheng. Sparsedrivev2: Scoring is all you need for end-to-end autonomous driving.arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.29163, 2026. 3

    work page arXiv 2026

  47. [47]

    Driving into the future: Multiview visual forecasting and planning with world model for au- tonomous driving

    Yuqi Wang, Jiawei He, Lue Fan, Hongxin Li, Yuntao Chen, and Zhaoxiang Zhang. Driving into the future: Multiview visual forecasting and planning with world model for au- tonomous driving. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Con- ference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 14749–14759, 2024. 1

    2024

  48. [48]

    Driving into the future: Multiview visual forecasting and planning with world model for au- tonomous driving

    Yuqi Wang, Jiawei He, Lue Fan, Hongxin Li, Yuntao Chen, and Zhaoxiang Zhang. Driving into the future: Multiview visual forecasting and planning with world model for au- tonomous driving. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Con- ference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 14749–14759, 2024. 4

    2024

  49. [49]

    Para-drive: Parallelized architecture for real- time autonomous driving

    Xinshuo Weng, Boris Ivanovic, Yan Wang, Yue Wang, and Marco Pavone. Para-drive: Parallelized architecture for real- time autonomous driving. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 15449–15458, 2024. 1

    2024

  50. [50]

    DriveLaW:Unifying Planning and Video Generation in a Latent Driving World

    Tianze Xia, Yongkang Li, Lijun Zhou, Jingfeng Yao, Kaixin Xiong, Haiyang Sun, Bing Wang, Kun Ma, Guang Chen, Hangjun Ye, et al. Drivelaw: Unifying planning and video generation in a latent driving world.arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.23421, 2025. 2

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  51. [51]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2511.20325 (2025) 4 18 X

    Tianyi Yan, Tao Tang, Xingtai Gui, Yongkang Li, Jiasen Zhesng, Weiyao Huang, Lingdong Kong, Wencheng Han, Xia Zhou, Xueyang Zhang, et al. Ad-r1: Closed-loop rein- forcement learning for end-to-end autonomous driving with impartial world models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2511.20325, 2025

    work page arXiv 2025

  52. [52]

    Worldrft: Latent world model planning with reinforcement fine-tuning for autonomous driving

    Pengxuan Yang, Ben Lu, Zhongpu Xia, Chao Han, Yin- feng Gao, Teng Zhang, Kun Zhan, XianPeng Lang, Yupeng Zheng, and Qichao Zhang. Worldrft: Latent world model planning with reinforcement fine-tuning for autonomous driving. InProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artifi- cial Intelligence, pages 11649–11657, 2026

    2026

  53. [53]

    Dreamerad: Efficient re- inforcement learning via latent world model for autonomous driving.arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.24587, 2026

    Pengxuan Yang, Yupeng Zheng, Deheng Qian, Zebin Xing, Qichao Zhang, Linbo Wang, Yichen Zhang, Shaoyu Guo, Zhongpu Xia, Qiang Chen, et al. Dreamerad: Efficient re- inforcement learning via latent world model for autonomous driving.arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.24587, 2026. 2

    work page arXiv 2026

  54. [54]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.06659 (2025)

    Wenhao Yao, Zhenxin Li, Shiyi Lan, Zi Wang, Xinglong Sun, Jose M Alvarez, and Zuxuan Wu. Drivesuprim: To- wards precise trajectory selection for end-to-end planning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.06659, 2025. 3

    work page arXiv 2025

  55. [55]

    DAPO: An Open-Source LLM Reinforcement Learning System at Scale

    Qiying Yu, Zheng Zhang, Ruofei Zhu, Yufeng Yuan, Xi- aochen Zuo, Yu Yue, Weinan Dai, Tiantian Fan, Gao- hong Liu, Lingjun Liu, et al. Dapo: An open-source llm reinforcement learning system at scale.arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.14476, 2025. 3

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  56. [56]

    Generative plan- ning for temporally coordinated exploration in reinforcement learning.arXiv preprint arXiv:2201.09765, 2022

    Haichao Zhang, Wei Xu, and Haonan Yu. Generative plan- ning for temporally coordinated exploration in reinforcement learning.arXiv preprint arXiv:2201.09765, 2022. 6

    work page arXiv 2022

  57. [57]

    Drivedreamer4d: World models are effective data machines for 4d driving scene rep- resentation

    Guosheng Zhao, Chaojun Ni, Xiaofeng Wang, Zheng Zhu, Xueyang Zhang, Yida Wang, Guan Huang, Xinze Chen, Boyuan Wang, Youyi Zhang, et al. Drivedreamer4d: World models are effective data machines for 4d driving scene rep- resentation. InProceedings of the Computer Vision and Pat- tern Recognition Conference, pages 12015–12026, 2025. 4

    2025

  58. [58]

    Re- condreamer++: Harmonizing generative and reconstructive models for driving scene representation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.18438, 2025

    Guosheng Zhao, Xiaofeng Wang, Chaojun Ni, Zheng Zhu, Wenkang Qin, Guan Huang, and Xingang Wang. Re- condreamer++: Harmonizing generative and reconstructive models for driving scene representation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.18438, 2025. 4

    work page arXiv 2025

  59. [59]

    Group Sequence Policy Optimization

    Chujie Zheng, Shixuan Liu, Mingze Li, Xiong-Hui Chen, Bowen Yu, Chang Gao, Kai Dang, Yuqiong Liu, Rui Men, An Yang, et al. Group sequence policy optimization.arXiv preprint arXiv:2507.18071, 2025. 3

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2025

  60. [60]

    Genad: Generative end-to-end au- tonomous driving

    Wenzhao Zheng, Ruiqi Song, Xianda Guo, Chenming Zhang, and Long Chen. Genad: Generative end-to-end au- tonomous driving. InEuropean Conference on Computer Vision, pages 87–104. Springer, 2024. 8, 10

    2024

  61. [61]

    Diffusion-based planning for autonomous driving with flexible guidance.arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.15564,

    Yinan Zheng, Ruiming Liang, Kexin Zheng, Jinliang Zheng, Liyuan Mao, Jianxiong Li, Weihao Gu, Rui Ai, Shengbo Eben Li, Xianyuan Zhan, et al. Diffusion-based planning for autonomous driving with flexible guidance. arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.15564, 2025. 1

    work page arXiv 2025

  62. [62]

    Unleashing the potential of diffusion models for end-to-end autonomous driving

    Yinan Zheng, Tianyi Tan, Bin Huang, Enguang Liu, Ruim- ing Liang, Jianlin Zhang, Jianwei Cui, Guang Chen, Kun Ma, Hangjun Ye, et al. Unleashing the potential of diffusion models for end-to-end autonomous driving.arXiv preprint arXiv:2602.22801, 2026. 2

    work page arXiv 2026

  63. [63]

    ResAD: Normalized residual trajectory modeling for end-to-end autonomous driving.arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.08562, 2025

    Zhiyu Zheng, Shaoyu Chen, Haoran Yin, Xinbang Zhang, Jialv Zou, Xinggang Wang, Qian Zhang, and Lefei Zhang. Resad: Normalized residual trajectory modeling for end-to- end autonomous driving.arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.08562,

    work page arXiv

  64. [64]

    Hugsim: A real-time, photo-realistic and closed-loop simulator for autonomous driving.arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.01718, 2024

    Hongyu Zhou, Longzhong Lin, Jiabao Wang, Yichong Lu, Dongfeng Bai, Bingbing Liu, Yue Wang, Andreas Geiger, and Yiyi Liao. Hugsim: A real-time, photo-realistic and closed-loop simulator for autonomous driving.arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.01718, 2024. 2

    work page arXiv 2024

  65. [65]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2010.09776 , year=

    Ming Zhou, Jun Luo, Julian Villella, Yaodong Yang, David Rusu, Jiayu Miao, Weinan Zhang, Montgomery Alban, Iman Fadakar, Zheng Chen, et al. Smarts: Scalable multi-agent reinforcement learning training school for autonomous driv- ing.arXiv preprint arXiv:2010.09776, 2020. 3

    work page arXiv 2010

  66. [66]

    AutoVLA: A Vision-Language-Action Model for End-to-End Autonomous Driving with Adaptive Reasoning and Reinforcement Fine-Tuning

    Zewei Zhou, Tianhui Cai, Seth Z Zhao, Yun Zhang, Zhiyu Huang, Bolei Zhou, and Jiaqi Ma. Autovla: A vision- language-action model for end-to-end autonomous driving with adaptive reasoning and reinforcement fine-tuning.arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.13757, 2025. 2, 3

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2025

  67. [67]

    Diffusiondrivev2: Rein- forcement learning-constrained truncated diffusion mod- eling in end-to-end autonomous driving.arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.07745,

    Jialv Zou, Shaoyu Chen, Bencheng Liao, Zhiyu Zheng, Yue- hao Song, Lefei Zhang, Qian Zhang, Wenyu Liu, and Xing- gang Wang. Diffusiondrivev2: Reinforcement learning- constrained truncated diffusion modeling in end-to-end au- tonomous driving.arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.07745, 2025. 1, 3

    work page arXiv 2025