arXiv Computer Vision

Reasoning models do not yet follow their reasoning in autonomous driving: The KITScenes LongTail Dataset

The paper introduces the KITScenes LongTail dataset, a curated collection of rare driving scenarios designed to evaluate how well reasoning models in autonomous driving follow their own reasoning. The authors find that many current models frequently diverge between the actions they state in their reasoning chains and the actions they actually execute, a phenomenon they term incoherence. They show that when the reasoning and execution disagree, the reasoning is often correct, and enforcing coherence via a kinematic model can improve motion planning, indicating that coherent action based on stated reasoning is essential for trustworthy autonomous driving.

arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 3

Beyond Textual Chain-of-Thought: A Survey on Action-Grounded Reasoning in Autonomous Driving

The paper surveys the transition from textual chain-of-thought reasoning to action-grounded reasoning in autonomous driving, highlighting that driving decisions require continuous actions that mirror the spatiotemporal structure of the physical world. It reviews 171 papers, categorizing 130 methods into four main types—language-based, visual-spatial, latent-dynamic, and externalized reasoning—along with 13 subtypes linked to specific regions of interest. The authors argue that the future of driving agent reasoning lies in intermediate representations that are grounded in reality, linked to real-time actions, and verifiable within safety-critical systems.

By Zhengxu Tang, Xiaozhou Zhang, Guofeng Cui, Ziyu Gong, Zi Wang, Yunfei Shi, Ruifeng Deng, Chengzhi Qi, Ke Chen, Sachin Patil, Tianjun Xiao, Langechuan Liu, Pichao Wang
arXiv AI
Oct 7

Grounding What Shapes the Plan: Rethinking Groundedness for Physical Intelligence in Autonomous Driving

arXiv:2610.07521v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Driving models increasingly ground reasoning in causal relations, spatial structure, perceptual evidence, and predicted futures. These advances make re...

By Minkyoung Cho, Zewei Zhou, Wenhao Ding, Shuhan Tan, Boyi Li, Yuxiao Chen, Yan Wang, Zheng Lian, Min-Hung Chen, Chaowei Xiao, Zhuoqing Mao, Boris Ivanovic, Marco Pavone, Yulong Cao
arXiv Computer Vision
Aug 27

Latent Chain-of-Thought World Modeling for End-to-End Driving

Latent-CoT-Drive (LCDrive) is a vision‑language‑action model for autonomous driving that replaces natural‑language chain‑of‑thought reasoning with a latent language capturing possible outcomes of driving actions. The model interleaves action‑proposal tokens, aligned with the model’s output actions, and world‑model tokens grounded in a learned latent world model to reason about future outcomes. After a supervised cold‑start using ground‑truth future rollouts, LCDrive is further refined with closed‑loop reinforcement learning, achieving faster inference, higher‑quality trajectories, and greater gains from interactive RL than both non‑reasoning and text‑reasoning baselines on a large‑scale end‑to‑end driving benchmark.

By Shuhan Tan, Kashyap Chitta, Yuxiao Chen, Ran Tian, Yurong You, Yan Wang, Wenjie Luo, Yulong Cao, Philipp Krahenbuhl, Marco Pavone, Boris Ivanovic
arXiv Computer Vision
Sep 30

CAR-VLA: Complexity-Aware and Risk-Adaptive Reasoning for Autonomous Driving

CAR‑VLA is a Vision‑Language‑Action model for autonomous driving that jointly considers scene complexity and dynamic risk to determine reasoning depth, urgency, and focus. It maps four complexity‑risk categories to three reasoning modes—Fast Intuition, Slow Thinking, and Reflex Response—each tailored to different driving scenarios. The model is trained via progressive supervised learning and reinforcement learning, achieving competitive performance on NAVSIM and Navhard benchmarks and demonstrating risk‑aware reasoning in high‑risk scenarios.

By Xiaolei Chen, Zhuolin He, Yuxuan Liang, Xu Li, Haotian Chen, Fan Shi, Mengyang Zhao, Wenjuan Meng, Zisheng Chen, Zhihao Zhu, Zhounan Jin, Hengli Wang, Qingfan Wang, Jiamei Liang, Bin Li, Xiangyang Xue
arXiv AI
Sep 24

AnchorReasoning: A Visual Grounding and Causal Reasoning Dataset in Long-Tail Autonomous Driving Scenarios

arXiv:2609. 28366v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Vision-language models (VLMs) offer a promising approach to long-tail autonomous driving, but existing driving datasets provide limited supervision for connecting decision-critical visual evidence with reasoning and planning.

By Zhipeng Bao, Wenjie Zhao, Tianle Zhu, Haohua Que, Chence Yang, Geng Yuan, Qianwen Li
arXiv AI
Oct 9

More Than Meets the Eye? Uncovering the Reasoning-Planning Disconnect in Training Vision-Language Driving Models

The paper introduces DriveMind, a large-scale driving Visual Question Answering corpus that aligns chain-of-thought reasoning with trajectory planning. Experiments with Vision‑Language Model agents show a causal disconnect: removing navigation priors significantly harms planning, while removing the chain-of-thought has little effect. The authors propose the Reasoning‑Planning Decoupling Hypothesis and present a training‑free probe to assess an agent’s reliance on priors.

By Xurui Song, Shuo Huai, JingJing Jiang, Jiayi Kong, Jun Luo
arXiv AI
Aug 5

Deferred Exposure of Future Trajectories for Verifiable Reasoning in Autonomous Driving VLMs

arXiv:2608. 01755v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Recent Vision-Language-Action (VLA) models for autonomous driving (AD) increasingly utilize chain-of-thought (CoT) supervision to enhance the reasoning capabilities of their Vision-Language Model (VLM) components, yet existing annotation pipelines commonly expose the teacher model to the logged ground-truth (GT) future trajectory.

By Zixuan Huang, Yang Zhou, Kaixuan Wang, Guli Zhang, Hongyan Xie, Yakun Zhu, Hao Geng, Xiaozhi Chen, Yikun Ban, Deqing Wang
arXiv AI
1d ago

STRIDE: Evaluating Spatiotemporal Reasoning in Driving Edge Cases

STRIDE (SpatioTemporal Reasoning In Driving Edge Cases) is a new benchmark designed to evaluate vision-language models on complex, safety-critical driving scenarios. It includes six task families—spatial perception, spatial understanding, temporal memory, temporal extrapolation, trajectory prediction, and scene-context awareness—using multiple-choice questions and free-form visual question answering that require detailed scene explanations and driving decision justifications. The benchmark focuses on unusual object behaviors and complex traffic interactions, and results show that even the best model, GPT‑6‑Astra, scores only 43.4% on average, highlighting significant gaps in spatiotemporal reasoning.

By Lieqi Liu, Rui gao, Jia-Chen Gu, Wenbo Hu, Zhaobin Mo, Ahmadreza Moradipari, Nejib Ammar, Wei Wang, Nanyun Peng
arXiv AI
Jul 7

Do Vision-Language-Action Models Mean What They Say? On the Role of Faithfulness in Embodied Reasoning

arXiv:2607. 04681v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Embodied Chain-of-Thought has emerged as a promising mechanism to enhance robot decision-making and interpretability in black-box Vision-Language Action (VLA) models.

By Matthew Foutter, Matteo Cercola, Lena Wild, Yunshan Wang, Michelle Li, Daniele Gammelli, Marco Pavone