arXiv:2606. 28758v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Predicting future states is essential for autonomous agents, yet current Vision-Language-Action (VLA) models fundamentally lack this capability, relying instead on reactive perception-action mapping.
arXiv:2606. 29879v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Vision-Language Models (VLMs) provide powerful semantic understanding and commonsense reasoning for End-to-End Autonomous Driving (E2E-AD) planning.
Autonomous driving requires planning under both semantic constraints and predictive dynamics. Existing end-to-end driving approaches, however, typically emphasize only one side of this requirement: Vision-Language-Action (VLA) models exploit VLM priors for semantic reasoning, while World Action Models (WAMs) provide future-aware prediction through generative world modeling.
arXiv:2607. 08375v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Vision-Language-Action (VLA) models have advanced end-to-end autonomous driving.
arXiv:2608. 12854v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Autonomous driving requires planning under both semantic constraints and predictive dynamics.
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.
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.
arXiv:2606. 06219v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: End-to-end autonomous driving models often struggle to balance multi-modal maneuver generation with real-time inference constraints.
arXiv:2608. 10976v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Vision-Language-Action (VLA) models can connect scene understanding, semantic reasoning, and trajectory generation for autonomous driving.
ForeDrive introduces a planning-relevant latent world model that is asymmetrically coupled to a Diffusion Transformer planner. The model learns multi‑horizon latent futures with a JEPA‑style world model, while planning gradients update the shared encoder and stop‑gradient routing trains the predictor with forecasting losses only. Gated visual fusion, future‑status injection, and Trajectory‑Adaptive Bias are used to guide trajectory generation without overriding current observations, achieving high performance on NAVSIM benchmarks using only front‑view images and pure imitation learning.
arXiv:2603. 22281v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Recent progress in latent world models (e.
arXiv:2607. 03182v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Autonomous driving planning requires translating navigation intent, traffic rules, dynamic interactions, and language instructions into executable continuous trajectories.
The paper introduces LaPla, a Vision‑Language‑Action framework that uses a latent‑aligned planning approach to convert discrete semantic reasoning into continuous, physics‑constrained driving actions. It employs a residual VQ‑VAE to encode vehicle kinematics into a structured latent space, then projects multimodal inputs—images, past actions, and text—directly into this latent space, allowing a frozen decoder to generate physically plausible trajectories without quantization errors. Experiments on nuScenes and NVIDIA AlpaSim show LaPla reduces long‑horizon L2 error by 15.52% and improves closed‑loop success rates by 33.34 percentage points while cutting inference latency.