Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This paper introduces the Rule-Aligned Diffusion Planner (RADP) to address limitations in diffusion-based autonomous driving planners, which often fail to explicitly model driving rules and struggle with long-tail scenarios. RADP integrates differentiable driving rules into the diffusion training objective, enabling intrinsic rule learning beyond imitation. The Rule-Pressure Attribution (RPA) mechanism then provides online, rule-level explanations for trajectory generation, validated by a temporal risk-alignment protocol showing consistent correlation with subsequent risks.
Autonomous driving diffusion planners now learn to intrinsically adhere to driving rules and explain their decisions, significantly improving safety in challenging scenarios.
Diffusion planners exhibit strong capabilities in generating multimodal trajectories. However, existing methods primarily rely on expert demonstrations to fit trajectory distributions, learning statistical correlations among scenes, behaviors, and trajectories without explicitly modeling driving rules. In long-tail scenarios where expert data are scarce, the lack of behaviors to imitate may lead to trajectories that violate safety or compliance requirements. Moreover, their generation process lacks rule-level explanations, making it difficult to determine which rules drive trajectory adjustments, when they take effect, and how strongly they act, thereby limiting failure diagnosis, safety validation, and targeted improvement. To address these limitations, we propose the Rule-Aligned Diffusion Planner (RADP), which incorporates differentiable driving rules into the diffusion objective during training, turning rule knowledge into intrinsic behavioral principles beyond finite demonstrations. We further introduce Rule-Pressure Attribution (RPA), which constructs supervision signals from gradients of rule losses with respect to predicted trajectories and employs a lightweight attribution head to estimate the optimization pressure exerted by each rule online. To assess the closed-loop behavioral relevance of these attributions, we propose a temporal risk-alignment protocol that evaluates whether current rule pressures reflect corresponding risks during subsequent closed-loop execution. Experiments on nuPlan show that RADP improves closed-loop planning in challenging safety-critical scenarios, while RPA exhibits consistent temporal alignment with subsequent rule-specific risks, validating both intrinsic rule learning and rule-level interpretability.