arXiv:2609.38028v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Autonomous vehicles interacting with passengers through natural language must reason beyond immediate commands. Passenger intent may span multiple st...
By Parthib Roy, Yash Tandon, Marcus Blennemann, Giovanni Tapia Lopez, Angel Martinez-Sanchez, Mohan M. Trivedi, Ross Greer
arXiv:2606. 14238v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Safety certification of Vision-Language-Action (VLA) driving planners under ISO 21448 (SOTIF) rests on an Operational Design Domain (ODD) specification that answers two complementary questions: when does the planner start to fail, and how severely does it fail once it does?
By Abhinaw Priyadershi, Jelena Frtunikj
The paper presents a chance-constrained belief-space planning framework for autonomous collision avoidance in low Earth orbit. It models uncertain orbital states as Gaussian beliefs and uses a Monte Carlo tree search to decide whether to wait for better tracking data or to execute a maneuver before the time of closest approach. Experiments on 96 scenarios from NASA’s dataset show that the planner can avoid maneuvers in about 40% of cases while keeping collision risk below the threshold, with performance heavily dependent on tracking quality and cadence.
By Grace Ra Kim, Duncan Eddy, Mykel J. Kochenderfer
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
PRISM (Proactive Risk Intelligence and Safety Management) is an agentic multi-model architecture designed to shift autonomous transportation safety from reactive crash avoidance to proactive, continuous risk management. It uses inverse crash‑probability modeling to transform binary crash classifiers into dynamic safety scores, and runs three specialized models—trajectory kinematics, environmental risk, and VRU interaction—coordinated by a reinforcement‑learning reasoning layer. Across 1,296 naturalistic driving scenarios, PRISM achieved a mean safety score of 68/100, classified 77.6% of situations as advisory, and flagged 3.8% as near‑misses, with 11% requiring intervention or emergency response, highlighting trajectory risk and VRU proximity as key safety factors.
By Joyjit Roy, Samaresh Kumar Singh, Sushanta Das
arXiv:2609.39971v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Vision-language-action (VLA) models can exceed 90% success on in-distribution tasks and withstand nuisance changes that preserve the required action,...
By Hung-Jen Chen, Yu-Hsun Hou, Yan-Hong Chen, Yan-Fu Chen, Binghua Cai, Min Sun, Chun-Yi Lee