Facilitating Autonomous Driving Tasks With Large Language Models
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We explore how large language models (LLMs) can expedite and automate the learning process for autonomous driving tasks. This involves harnessing LLM knowledge to shape a learning framework and utilizing LLMs to guide the learning process. We conduct a case study to demonstrate LLMs’ ability to export driving rules. LLM outputs may not be entirely reliable for the direct handling of driving decisions due to potential inaccuracies and inconsistencies. To address these issues, we propose integrating LLM knowledge with statistical learning. This enables LLMs to export task-specific knowledge as symbolic rules, forming the initial learning structure. Rule weights are calculated based on statistical salience derived from training data, resulting in a set of weighted rules for robust decision making. Furthermore, this set of weighted rules preserves strong semantics, allowing LLMs to comprehend and make modifications based on varying needs. Simulations using a highway driving simulator validate the effectiveness of our approach.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it