Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
38 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
59 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
41 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
7 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
50 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Evaluation of Large Language Models for Decision Making in Autonomous Driving (2312.06351v1)

Published 11 Dec 2023 in cs.CV, cs.CL, and cs.RO
Evaluation of Large Language Models for Decision Making in Autonomous Driving

Abstract: Various methods have been proposed for utilizing LLMs in autonomous driving. One strategy of using LLMs for autonomous driving involves inputting surrounding objects as text prompts to the LLMs, along with their coordinate and velocity information, and then outputting the subsequent movements of the vehicle. When using LLMs for such purposes, capabilities such as spatial recognition and planning are essential. In particular, two foundational capabilities are required: (1) spatial-aware decision making, which is the ability to recognize space from coordinate information and make decisions to avoid collisions, and (2) the ability to adhere to traffic rules. However, quantitative research has not been conducted on how accurately different types of LLMs can handle these problems. In this study, we quantitatively evaluated these two abilities of LLMs in the context of autonomous driving. Furthermore, to conduct a Proof of Concept (POC) for the feasibility of implementing these abilities in actual vehicles, we developed a system that uses LLMs to drive a vehicle.

Introduction

The integration of LLMs into autonomous driving systems has spurred interest in understanding how well these models can comprehend spatial relationships and adhere to traffic rules when making decisions. As driving conditions are unpredictable, and scenarios often diverge from structured datasets, the potential of LLMs to use their extensive training from diverse textual data to navigate unfamiliar scenarios is particularly alluring. These models may also tackle higher-level tasks such as applying ethical reasoning in complex driving situations.

Methodology

The assessment of LLMs' decision-making abilities in autonomous driving is twofold: evaluating spatial-aware decision-making (SADM) and compliance with traffic rules (FTR). Investigations encompassed simulated real-world traffic scenarios for detailed analysis and an actual vehicle test to examine practical applications. In simulations, LLMs were presented with scenarios along a two-lane road and needed to consider vehicle positions and velocities, as well as traffic rules conveyed in natural language. They had to choose appropriate driving actions and explain their reasoning. In real-world experiments, an LLM guided a vehicle towards destinations while obeying commands from a traffic officer, prioritizing its spatial-awareness and rule-following capabilities.

Experiments and Results

Quantitative and qualitative evaluations were conducted on three LLMs with varying capabilities. Metrics included correct decision-making, such as when to accelerate or change lanes (SADM), adherence to speed limits and overtaking rules (FTR), and their combined challenge (SADM&FTR). The public LLM LLaMA-2 7B and the more powerful private models GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 were compared. GPT-4 emerged as significantly more accurate across all metrics and appeared to benefit from being prompted to provide reasoning. A qualitative review highlighted that GPT-4 could even override incorrect human instructions to comply with the speed limit, demonstrating an advanced understanding of priority in a given situation.

Conclusion and Limitations

Through comprehensive testing in simulation and real-world conditions, certain LLMs, especially GPT-4, showed remarkable precision in making spatial-aware decisions and following traffic legislation. However, their application in autonomous driving systems is not without challenges. Internet communication and processing times remain concerns for real-time decision-making. Additionally, the balancing act between decision-making accuracy and computational efficiency is a crucial consideration for incorporating LLMs into practical autonomous driving solutions. These findings underscore the significance of enhancing LLM capabilities for their application in the dynamic and complex field of autonomous driving.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (12)
  1. Do as i can, not as i say: Grounding language in robotic affordances. arXiv preprint arXiv:2204.01691, 2022.
  2. Explainable artificial intelligence (xai): What we know and what is left to attain trustworthy artificial intelligence. Information Fusion, 99:101805, 2023.
  3. Language models are few-shot learners. Advances in neural information processing systems, 33:1877–1901, 2020.
  4. Driving with llms: Fusing object-level vector modality for explainable autonomous driving. arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.01957, 2023.
  5. Talk2car: Taking control of your self-driving car. arXiv preprint arXiv:1909.10838, 2019.
  6. Hilm-d: Towards high-resolution understanding in multimodal large language models for autonomous driving. arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.05186, 2023.
  7. Drive like a human: Rethinking autonomous driving with large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.07162, 2023.
  8. Inner monologue: Embodied reasoning through planning with language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2207.05608, 2022.
  9. Gpt-driver: Learning to drive with gpt. arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.01415, 2023.
  10. Languagempc: Large language models as decision makers for autonomous driving. arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.03026, 2023.
  11. Lm-nav: Robotic navigation with large pre-trained models of language, vision, and action. In Conference on Robot Learning, pages 492–504. PMLR, 2023.
  12. Drivegpt4: Interpretable end-to-end autonomous driving via large language model. arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.01412, 2023.
User Edit Pencil Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
Authors (14)
  1. Kotaro Tanahashi (9 papers)
  2. Yuichi Inoue (5 papers)
  3. Yu Yamaguchi (8 papers)
  4. Hidetatsu Yaginuma (1 paper)
  5. Daiki Shiotsuka (2 papers)
  6. Hiroyuki Shimatani (1 paper)
  7. Kohei Iwamasa (1 paper)
  8. Yoshiaki Inoue (10 papers)
  9. Takafumi Yamaguchi (1 paper)
  10. Koki Igari (1 paper)
  11. Tsukasa Horinouchi (1 paper)
  12. Kento Tokuhiro (2 papers)
  13. Yugo Tokuchi (1 paper)
  14. Shunsuke Aoki (8 papers)
Citations (8)
X Twitter Logo Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com