arXiv Computation and Language 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

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

Read the original on arXiv Computation and Language →

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.

Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv Computation and Language.

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 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 31

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.

By Royden Wagner, Omer Sahin Tas, Jaime Villa, Felix Hauser, Yinzhe Shen, Marlon Steiner, Dominik Strutz, Carlos Fernandez, Quentin Delfosse, Christoph Weinhuber, Christian Kinzig, Guillermo S. Gutierrez-Cabello, Hendrik K\"onigshof, Fabian Immel, Richard Schwarzkopf, Nils Alexander Rack, Kevin R\"osch, Kaiwen Wang, Jan-Hendrik Pauls, Martin Lauer, Igor Gilitschenski, Holger Caesar, Christoph Stiller
arXiv AI
Jun 24

Neuro-Symbolic Drive: Rule-Grounded Faithful Reasoning for Driving VLAs

arXiv:2606. 23938v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Driving VLA models incorporating Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning are attractive because they leverage pretrained VLM representations and expose intermediate decisions in natural language, yet current rationales often lack the step-by-step decision semantics needed to keep the rationale causally connected to the planned motion.

By Xiangbo Gao, Xiukun Huang, Boyu Lu, Junge Zhang, Mengjie Mao, Jiachen Li, Wei Xiong, Zhengzhong Tu