SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2411.16587

Large Language Model-based Decision-making for COLREGs and the Control of Autonomous Surface Vehicles

Abstract

In the field of autonomous surface vehicles (ASVs), devising decision-making and obstacle avoidance solutions that address maritime COLREGs (Collision Regulations), primarily defined for human operators, has long been a pressing challenge. Recent advancements in explainable Artificial Intelligence (AI) and machine learning have shown promise in enabling human-like decision-making. Notably, significant developments have occurred in the application of Large Language Models (LLMs) to the decision-making of complex systems, such as self-driving cars. The textual and somewhat ambiguous nature of COLREGs (from an algorithmic perspective), however, poses challenges that align well with the capabilities of LLMs, suggesting that LLMs may become increasingly suitable for this application soon. This paper presents and demonstrates the first application of LLM-based decision-making and control for ASVs. The proposed method establishes a high-level decision-maker that uses online collision risk indices and key measurements to make decisions for safe manoeuvres. A tailored design and runtime structure is developed to support training and real-time action generation on a realistic ASV model. Local planning and control algorithms are integrated to execute the commands for waypoint following and collision avoidance at a lower level. To the authors' knowledge, this study represents the first attempt to apply explainable AI to the dynamic control problem of maritime systems recognising the COLREGs rules, opening new avenues for research in this challenging area. Results obtained across multiple test scenarios demonstrate the system's ability to maintain online COLREGs compliance, accurate waypoint tracking, and feasible control, while providing human-interpretable reasoning for each decision.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Klinsmann Agyei, Pouria Sarhadi, Wasif Naeem. 2024-11-25. Large Language Model-based Decision-making for COLREGs and the Control of Autonomous Surface Vehicles. https://arxiv.org/abs/2411.16587

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

IMLE-VLA: Fast Single-Step Action Generation for Vision-Language-Action Policies

Vision-language-action (VLA) policies leverage pretrained vision-language backbones to achieve strong cross-task generalization. A leading design couples this backbone with a dedicated continuous action head trained via diffusion or flow matching. However, such heads rely on iterative multi-step sampling, for example 10 Euler steps in $\pi_{0.5}$. This creates an inference bottleneck that produces stop-and-go movement in the robot and slower task completion. We introduce IMLE-VLA, which replaces the iterative action head with a single-step conditional generator trained via conditional Implicit Maximum Likelihood Estimation (cIMLE). The cIMLE objective promotes multimodal action coverage, avoiding the mode collapse of naive regression heads while eliminating multi-step sampling entirely. When IMLE-VLA is applied to $\pi_{0.5}$, it increases inference frequency 3.67x (55 Hz vs. 15 Hz), enabling up to 11x higher action throughput. On the 40-task LIBERO benchmark, IMLE-VLA achieves the highest average success rate (98.0%) among all baselines while leading in inference frequency. Under the test-time perturbations of LIBERO-plus, IMLE-VLA retains $\pi_{0.5}$'s robustness while other baselines degrade sharply, confirming that the cIMLE head preserves generalization. Real-world experiments on a Franka Emika Panda across four tasks demonstrate smoother motion (2.2x to 3.0x lower jerk) and faster task completion, with IMLE-VLA outperforming $\pi_{0.5}$ on every task and reducing average VLA inference time per episode by 3.9x to 6.6x. Videos and code are available at https://kianhk6.github.io/IMLE-VLA/

cs.RO

ObstaDiff: Generalizable Diffusion Policy Learning via Obstacle-aware Representations

Imitation learning has achieved impressive results in robotic manipulation, yet most existing approaches assume clean backgrounds and lack explicit mechanisms for obstacle-aware motion generation. Extending such policies to cluttered, real-world scenes with unstructured obstacles remains a key generalization challenge. We present ObstaDiff, a decomposed diffusion-policy framework with a lightweight obstacle-aware visual encoder. ObstaDiff extracts a structured target-obstacle-background representation, enabling the downstream alignment policy to generate end-effector trajectories toward a target-centered bottleneck pose while reasoning about surrounding obstacles. We evaluate ObstaDiff on 61 real-robot greenhouse trials per method (366 executions in total). ObstaDiff achieves 75.41% average task success and 8.20% average obstacle collision rate, outperforming representative imitation-learning baselines and improving generalization in cluttered agricultural scenes.

cs.RO

Testing Between the Test Cases: Proving End-to-End Steering in Conditions You Never Drove

AI-based automated vehicle testing is challenging because a model that passes every test condition can still fail in the real world. Formal verification offers a way to directly address this gap. On a simulated highway and an arterial road we trained two small end-to-end steering networks each in CARLA, one on clear conditions alone and one on clear, fog, night and low sun. All four models were driven against a 2.19 ft lane-departure budget. Without driving again, we used bound propagation, a formal method that reads the trained weights, to compute how far steering can drift at every disturbance strength between two captured images. One calculation covers more than a campaign could drive: on the arterial it spans 133 poses, where ten intensities each would be 10^133 combinations, in minutes on one GPU. Not only did formal verification find conditions that broke the clear-trained policy without simulation testing, it provided some preliminary evidence for potential failures between the test cases. Our overall conclusion is that formal verification is a viable complement to simulation, and could be adopted as a part of verification and validation for automated driving.

cs.RO