MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Non-differentiable Reward Optimization for Diffusion-based Autonomous Motion Planning

2025· article· W4416749103 on OpenAlexaff
Giwon Lee, Dae-Hee Park, Jaewoo Jeong, Kuk-Jin Yoon

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldEngineering
TopicAutonomous Vehicle Technology and Safety
Canadian institutionsKootenay Association for Science & Technology
FundersKorea Health Industry Development InstituteNational Research FoundationMinistry of Health
KeywordsReinforcement learningMotion planningMotion (physics)Measure (data warehouse)Differentiable functionThresholding

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Safe and effective motion planning is crucial for autonomous robots. Diffusion models excel at capturing complex agent interactions, a fundamental aspect of decision-making in dynamic environments. Recent studies have successfully applied diffusion models to motion planning, demonstrating their competence in handling complex scenarios and accurately predicting multi-modal future trajectories. Despite their effectiveness, diffusion models have limitations in training objectives, as they approximate data distributions rather than explicitly capturing the underlying decision-making dynamics. However, the crux of motion planning lies in non-differentiable downstream objectives, such as safety (collision avoidance) and effectiveness (goal-reaching), which conventional learning algorithms cannot directly optimize. In this paper, we propose a reinforcement learning-based training scheme for diffusion motion planning models, enabling them to effectively learn non-differentiable objectives that explicitly measure safety and effectiveness. Specifically, we introduce a reward-weighted dynamic thresholding algorithm to shape a dense reward signal, facilitating more effective training and outperforming models trained with differentiable objectives. State-of-the-art performance on pedestrian datasets (CrowdNav, ETH-UCY) compared to various baselines demonstrates the versatility of our approach for safe and effective motion planning.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.916
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.224 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAutonomous Vehicle Technology and SafetyFrench-language works237,207