MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

RALAD: Bridging the Real-to-Sim Domain Gap in Autonomous Driving with Retrieval-Augmented Learning

2025· article· W4416749873 on OpenAlexaff
Haibo Hu, Zikang Zhou, Yufei Cui, Ziquan Liu, Jianping Wang, Nan Guan, Jinfeng Wang, Chun Jason Xue

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldEngineering
TopicAutonomous Vehicle Technology and Safety
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsBridging (networking)Feature (linguistics)Domain (mathematical analysis)Bridge (graph theory)Key (lock)GeneralizationFeature extractionLimitingAdvanced driver assistance systems

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As end-to-end autonomous driving advances toward real-world deployment, ensuring the safety of autonomous vehicles (AVs) has become a critical requirement for their commercial viability. While rule-based AVs have traditionally undergone rigorous testing in both real-world and simulated environments before deployment, data-driven autonomous models are typically trained on real-world datasets, limiting their generalization to simulation environments. This poses a significant challenge for the development and testing of end-to-end autonomous driving. To address this issue, we propose Retrieval-Augmented Learning for Autonomous Driving (RALAD), a novel framework designed to bridge the real-to-sim gap in a cost-effective manner. RALAD consists of three key components: (1) domain adaptation via an enhanced Optimal Transport (OT) method, which retrieves the most similar scenarios between real and simulated environments; (2) feature fusion across similar scenarios, enabling the construction of a feature mapping between real-world and simulated domains; and (3) feature extraction freezing with fine-tuning on the fused features, allowing the model to learn simulation-specific characteristics through feature mapping. We evaluate RALAD on three monocular 3D object detection models, and the results demonstrate that our approach significantly improves model accuracy in simulation. Additionally, we use real autonomous vehicle for testing in real-world scenarios, and have established simulated scenes similar to reality for further testing, which illustrate the effectiveness of our method.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.200
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.216 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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