arXiv preprint ·
Language2Drive: Do Vision-Language-Action Models Really Follow the Instructions in Autonomous Driving?
- Published
- Source
- arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
- Original
- Read it at arXiv
- Topics
Abstract
Recent Vision-Language-Action (VLA) models increasingly use natural-language instructions to condition autonomous driving behavior. Yet existing closed-loop benchmarks primarily measure route completion, safety, and rule compliance, leaving a fundamental question unresolved: does language actually determine which feasible behavior the vehicle executes? A trajectory may be safe and successful while still violating or even ignoring the passenger's instruction. To address this, we introduce \ltd, a benchmark designed to directly test this capability. Its key evaluation unit, the paired counterfactual unit (PCU), holds the initial driving scene fixed while changing only the instruction. This design enables us to distinguish isolated instruction success from counterfactual paired success across four instruction-following scopes. To test whether this distinction persists across evaluation regimes, we instantiate Language2Drive in complementary closed-loop CARLA simulation, reconstructed real-world scenes, and open-loop driving benchmarks, including our released CARLA-Language2Drive simulator with purpose-built maps. Evaluating representative driving VLAs across these settings reveals a striking mismatch between strong driving competence and weak language control: 93.2% of successful rollouts do not have a successful counterpart under the alternative feasible instruction. This failure is dominated by one-sided completion, where a model repeatedly executes one preferred behavior but fails when the same scene requires the counterfactual alternative. These results expose two fundamental limitations of current evaluation: isolated success and driving scores, which are widely used by conventional driving benchmarks, can substantially overstate language-following capability, while current driving VLAs themselves lack reliable instruction following under matched counterfactual tests.
The authors’ abstract, as arXiv lists it. arXiv’s listings, abstracts included, are free for anyone to reuse.
Read it on ReadSearch
Each opens after you create an account, and brings you back to this paper.
More in Robotics
PathLift: Depth-Conditioned Metric Lifting for Visual-Navigation Priors
An Optimal Algorithm for Changing from Longitudinal to Latitudinal Formation of Autonomous Aircraft Squadrons
Constrained Differentiable Policy Learning for Safe Quadrotor Navigation
YUBI-Real2Sim: 3DGS Scene Verification for Reliable Policy Evaluation
Directional Pullback Regularization for Long-Horizon Rollout of Latent World Models in Autonomous Driving
Get the few papers worth your time in Robotics every morning.
ReadSearch reads the new papers in your field each day and brings you the few worth reading, each with its key finding in a sentence.