analiza aiqbench
This research introduces RADP, a diffusion-based planner that integrates differentiable driving rules directly into the training objective to ensure safety compliance without relying solely on expert demonstrations. By employing Rule-Pressure Attribution, the method provides interpretable insights into how specific traffic regulations influence trajectory generation, addressing critical gaps in failure diagnosis for autonomous systems. The approach demonstrates improved performance in long-tail scenarios where traditional imitation learning struggles due to data scarcity.
Learning to Explain While Planning: Rule-Aligned Diffusion Planning for Autonomous Driving
arXiv:2609.39995v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Diffusion planners exhibit strong capabilities in generating multimodal trajectories. However, existing methods primarily rely on expert demonstrations to fit trajectory distributions, learning statistical correlations among scenes, behaviors, and trajectories without explicitly modeling driving rules. In long-tail scenarios where expert data are scarce, the lack of behaviors to imitate may lead to trajectories that violate safety or compliance requirements. Moreover, their generation process lacks rule-level explanations, making it difficult to determine which rules drive trajectory adjustments, when they take effect, and how strongly they act, thereby limiting failure diagnosis, safety validation, and targeted improvement. To address these limitations, we propose the Rule-Aligned Diffusion Planner (RADP), which incorporates differentiable driving rules into the diffusion objective during training, turning rule knowledge into intrinsic behavioral principles beyond finite demonstrations. We further introduce Rule-Pressure Attribution (RPA), which constructs supervision signals from gradients of rule losses with respect to predicted trajectories and employs a lightweight attribution head to estimate the optimization pressure exerted by each rule online. To assess the closed-loop behavioral relevance of these attributions, we propose a temporal risk-alignment protocol that evaluates whether current rule pressures reflect corresponding risks during subsequent closed-loop execution. Experiments on nuPlan show that RADP improves closed-loop planning in challenging safety-critical scenarios, while RPA exhibits consistent temporal alignment with subsequent rule-specific risks, validating both intrinsic rule learning and rule-level interpretability.
Abstract:Diffusion planners exhibit strong capabilities in generating multimodal trajectories. However, existing methods primarily rely on expert demonstrations to fit trajectory distributions, learning statistical correlations among scenes, behaviors, and trajectories without explicitly modeling driving rules. In long-tail scenarios where expert data are scarce, the lack of behaviors to imitate may lead to trajectories that violate safety or compliance requirements. Moreover, their generation process lacks rule-level explanations, making it difficult to determine which rules drive trajectory adjustments, when they take effect, and how strongly they act, thereby limiting failure diagnosis, safety validation, and targeted improvement. To address these limitations, we propose the Rule-Aligned Diffusion Planner (RADP), which incorporates differentiable driving rules into the diffusion objective during training, turning rule knowledge into intrinsic behavioral principles beyond finite demonstrations. We further introduce Rule-Pressure Attribution (RPA), which constructs supervision signals from gradients of rule losses with respect to predicted trajectories and employs a lightweight attribution head to estimate the optimization pressure exerted by each rule online. To assess the closed-loop behavioral relevance of these attributions, we propose a temporal risk-alignment protocol that evaluates whether current rule pressures reflect corresponding risks during subsequent closed-loop execution. Experiments on nuPlan show that RADP improves closed-loop planning in challenging safety-critical scenarios, while RPA exhibits consistent temporal alignment with subsequent rule-specific risks, validating both intrinsic rule learning and rule-level interpretability.
Machine Learning (cs.LG)
arXiv:2609.39995 [cs.LG]
(or arXiv:2609.39995v1 [cs.LG] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.39995 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 314 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe

Research Note: Filtering Subversion-Relevant Information From Pretraining Data Is Feasible
LessWrong · 5 oct. 2026
Against Export Controls (and China Threat Models)
LessWrong · 24 sept. 2026
Biological Superintelligence
LessWrong · 30 iul. 2026
Links #5: 2026/07
LessWrong · 31 iul. 2026