SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2602.10285

Adaptive Time Step Flow Matching for Autonomous Driving Motion Planning

Abstract

Autonomous driving requires reasoning about interactions with surrounding traffic. A prevailing approach is large-scale imitation learning on expert driving datasets, aimed at generalizing across diverse real-world scenarios. For online trajectory generation, such methods must operate at real-time rates. Diffusion models require hundreds of denoising steps at inference, resulting in high latency. Consistency models mitigate this issue but rely on carefully tuned noise schedules to capture the multimodal action distributions common in autonomous driving. Adapting the schedule, typically requires expensive retraining. To address these limitations, we propose a framework based on conditional flow matching that jointly predicts future motions of surrounding agents and plans the ego trajectory in real time. We train a lightweight variance estimator that selects the number of inference steps online, removing the need for retraining to balance runtime and imitation learning performance. To further enhance ride quality, we introduce a trajectory post-processing step cast as a convex quadratic program, with negligible computational overhead. Trained on the Waymo Open Motion Dataset, the framework performs maneuvers such as lane changes, cruise control, and navigating unprotected left turns without requiring scenario-specific tuning. Our method maintains a 20 Hz update rate on an NVIDIA RTX 3070 GPU, making it suitable for online deployment. Compared to transformer, diffusion, and consistency model baselines, we achieve improved trajectory smoothness and better adherence to dynamic constraints. Experiment videos and code implementations can be found at https://flow-matching-self-driving.github.io/.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Ananya Trivedi, Anjian Li, Mohamed Elnoor, Yusuf Umut Ciftci, Avinash Singh, Jovin D'sa, Sangjae Bae, David Isele, Taskin Padir, Faizan M. Tariq. 2026-02-10. Adaptive Time Step Flow Matching for Autonomous Driving Motion Planning. https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.10285

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