Diffusion-based models have recently shown strong performance in trajectory planning, as they are capable of capturing diverse, multimodal distributions of complex behaviors. A key limitation of these models is their slow inference speed, which results from the iterative denoising process. This makes them less suitable for real-time applications such as closed-loop model predictive control (MPC), where plans must be generated quickly and adapted continuously to a changing environment. In this paper, we investigate Implicit Maximum Likelihood Estimation (IMLE) as an alternative generative modeling approach for planning. IMLE offers strong mode coverage while enabling inference that is two orders of magnitude faster, making it particularly well suited for real-time MPC tasks. Our results demonstrate that IMLE achieves competitive performance on standard offline reinforcement learning benchmarks compared to the standard diffusion-based planner, while substantially improving planning speed in both open-loop and closed-loop settings. We further validate IMLE in a closed-loop human navigation scenario, operating in real-time, demonstrating how it enables rapid and adaptive plan generation in dynamic environments. Real-world videos and code are available at https://gmpc-imle.github.io/.
Figures & tables
Fig. 1: IMLE-based planning. (1) Noise is sampled from a Gaussian distribution. (2) Our model generates a set of candidate trajectories from the sampled noise. (3) Sampling-based model predictive control is used to select and refine the top trajectory.
Fig. 2: Illustration of IMLE’s nearest neighbor matching. The method enforces that, for every data point, there exists a generated sample in its neighborhood, ensuring that the generator covers the full data distribution.
Fig. 3: FiLM-conditioned block used throughout the U-Net. Two small MLPs conditioning c to scale γ(c) and shift β(c) , which modulate the two blocks via FiLM ( x↦γ(c)⊙x+β(c) ).
Fig. 4: IMLE vs Diffusion. Median per-plan latency (ms) split into generator and guidance on CPU/GPU, averaged over Walker/Hopper/HalfCheetah (Batch Size 64)
TABLE II: Performance comparison of reward-weighted IMLE variants.
Dataset
Environment
Diffuser
IMLE
Single Task
U-Maze
113.9 ± 3.1
124.8 ± 0.65
Medium
121.5 ± 2.7
117.3 ± 3.53
Large
123.0 ± 6.4
129.2 ± 4.89
Average
119.5
123.7
Multi Task
U-Maze
128.9 ± 1.8
132.3 ± 0.97
Medium
127.2 ± 3.4
127.8 ± 2.60
TABLE III: Performance comparison across Maze2D Datasets. (Batch Size 1)
Metric
MPPI
CoBL
CFM
IMLE
IMLE+MPPI
Collision Radius = 0.5 m
Collision Rate (%) ↓
10.00
10.20
5.80
9.80
4.60
Goal Error (m) ↓
0.521
0.050
0.431
0.181
0.360
Smoothness (m/s) ↓
0.772
0.606
0.623
0.397
0.394
Jerk (m/s 3 ) ↓
1.746
1.407
0.812
0.458
0.479
Collision Radius = 0.7 m
TABLE IV: Planner performance across UCY Scenes. (batch size 64)
Metric
Line
CoBL
CFM
IMLE
Collision Radius = 0.7 m
Collision Rate (%) ↓
16.40
8.80
11.40
10.20
Goal Error (m) ↓
0.570
0.431
0.447
0.396
Smoothness (m/s) ↓
0.760
0.760
0.613
0.394
Jerk (m/s 3 ) ↓
1.746
0.759
0.787
0.484
Sampling Frequency on CPU (Hz) ↑
125.00
0.41
2.55
52.63
TABLE V: Performance comparison between different warm-start strategies for MPPI across UCY scenes. (batch size 64)
Fig. 5: Using IMLE-generated plans at 50 Hz, the robot reaches the goal while avoiding collisions. The top row shows the conditioning variables (robot and pedestrian past and current states). We also plot the generated plan and the waypoint tracked by the low-level controller.
Parameter
Value
Latent dimension
16
Channel multipliers
(1,4,16)
Planning horizon
32
IMLE sample factor K
4
Learning rate
1×10−3
Batch size
32
TABLE VI: Key hyperparameters for D4RL locomotion experiments.
Parameter
Value
Latent dimension
3
Channel multipliers
(1,2,4,8)
Planning horizon
256
IMLE sample factor K
10
Learning rate
1×10−4
Batch size
32
TABLE VII: Key hyperparameters for D4RL Maze2D experiments.
IMLE
Diffusion
CFM
Architecture
Base dimension
32
32
32
Channel multipliers
(1,4)/(1,2,4)/(1,2,4,8)
same
same
Training
Learning rate
1×10−4
2×10−5
2×10−5
Batch size
64
64
64
TABLE VIII: Architecture and training hyperparameters for navigation experiments.
Parameter
Value
Planning horizon
20 / 40 / 80
Time discretization Δt
0.4 / 0.2 / 0.1 s
Trajectory samples
64
MPPI perturbation samples
32
MPPI temperature
0.5
Safety radius
0.5 / 0.7 m
TABLE IX: Planning and sampling parameters.
Metric
Straight
CoBL
CFM
IMLE
Collision Rate (%)
7.40
6.40
8.40
5.60
Goal Error (m)
0.829
0.913
0.842
0.561
Smoothness (m/s)
1.715
0.891
0.493
0.817
Jerk (m/s 3 )
7.013
0.883
1.141
1.549
CPU Sampling (Hz)
90.91
0.19
1.50
34.48
GPU Sampling (Hz)
125
0.56
2.05
58.82
TABLE X: Performance comparison between warm starts across 500 UCY scenes (batch size 64, H=40 ).
Metric
Straight
CoBL
CFM
IMLE
Collision Rate (%)
1.40
0.60
1.20
1.40
Goal Error (m)
0.518
0.672
0.580
0.352
Smoothness (m/s)
3.736
1.571
0.465
1.016
Jerk (m/s 3 )
27.997
3.152
2.405
3.505
CPU Sampling (Hz)
50.00
0.10
0.70
21.74
GPU Sampling (Hz)
83.33
0.49
1.94
40.00
TABLE XI: Performance comparison between warm starts across 500 UCY scenes (batch size 64, H=80 ).
Dataset
Environment
BC
CQL
IQL
DT
TT
MOPO
MOReL
MBOP
Diffuser
IMLE+Exp RW
Medium-Expert
HalfCheetah
55.2
91.6
86.7
86.8
95.0
63.3
53.3
105.9
88.9 ± 0.3
91.9 ± 0.09
Hopper
52.5
105.4
91.5
107.6
110.0
23.7
108.7
55.1
103.3 ± 1.3
104.2 ± 3.81
Walker2d
107.5
108.8
109.6
108.1
101.9
44.6
95.6
70.2
106.9 ± 0.2
107.9 ± 0.40
Medium
HalfCheetah
42.6
44.0
47.4
42.6
46.9
42.3
42.1
44.6
42.8 ± 0.3
43.1 ± 0.29
Hopper
52.9
58.5
66.3
67.6
61.1
28.0
95.4
48.8
74.3 ± 1.4
85.0 ± 4.02
Walker2d
75.3
72.5
78.3
74.0
79.0
17.8
77.8
41.0
79.6 ± 0.55
78.3 ± 2.75
TABLE XII: Performance comparison across MuJoCo locomotion datasets. Baselines are taken from [ 15 ] . Bold indicates within 5% of the maximum reward.
Setting
Env
MPPI
CQL
IQL
Diffuser
IMLE
Single Task
U-Maze
33.2
5.7
47.4
113.9 ± 3.1
124.8 ± 0.65
Medium
10.2
5.0
34.9
121.5 ± 2.7
117.3 ± 3.53
Large
5.1
12.5
58.6
123.0 ± 6.4
129.2 ± 4.89
Single-task Average
16.2
7.7
47.0
119.5
123.7
Multi Task
U-Maze
41.2
—
24.8
128.9 ± 1.8
132.3 ± 0.97
Medium
15.4
—
12.1
127.2 ± 3.4
127.8 ± 2.60
TABLE XIII: Performance comparison across Maze2D datasets (batch size 1). Baselines are taken from [ 15 ] .
Torch
JAX
Task
CPU
GPU
CPU
GPU
Locomotion
32.87
53.52
19.23
87.56
Maze
114.63
101.28
91.04
133.98
TABLE XIV: Sampling frequency (Hz) of Torch and JAX implementations.
Fig. 6: Qualitative comparison of trajectory proposals for a representative scene. Each panel shows sampled trajectories and the selected plan.
Diffusion-based trajectory planners can synthesize rich, multimodal robot motions, but their iterative denoising makes online planning and control prohibitively slow. Existing accelerations either modify the sampler or compress the network--sacrificing plan quality or requiring retraining without accounting for downstream control risk. We address the problem of making diffusion-based trajectory planners fast enough for real-time robot use without retraining the model or sacrificing trajectory quality, and in a way that works across diverse state-space diffusion architectures. Our key insight is that diffusion trajectory planners expose two signals we can exploit: a cheap probe of how their internal trajectory representation changes across steps, and analytic coefficients that describe how denoiser errors affect the sampler's state update. By calibrating the first signal against the second on offline runs, we obtain a per-step score that upper-bounds how far the final trajectory can deviate when we reuse a cached denoiser output, and we treat this bound as an uncertainty budget that we can spend over the denoising process. Building on this insight, we present Muninn, a training-free caching wrapper that tracks this uncertainty budget during sampling and, at each diffusion step, chooses between reusing a cached denoiser output when the predicted deviation is small and recomputing the denoiser when it is not. Across standard benchmarks Muninn delivers up to 4.6x wall-clock speedups across several trajectory diffusion models by reducing denoiser evaluations, while preserving task performance and safety metrics. Muninn further certifies that cached rollouts remain within a specified distance of their full-compute counterparts, and we validate these gains in real-time closed-loop navigation and manipulation hardware deployments. Project page: https://github.com/gokulp01/Muninn.
World models can enable Model Predictive Control (MPC), but this requires dynamics prediction that is both fast enough for online use and expressive enough to represent uncertain futures. Diffusion models offer a natural mechanism for modeling uncertain dynamics, yet their iterative inference procedure makes them difficult to use for low-latency latent planning. We bridge this gap with Value Diffusion World Models (Valdi), combining end-to-end online training for MPC with a latent diffusion dynamics model. In preliminary experiments on the CarRacing environment, we show that Valdi, using a single diffusion step at both training and inference, matches a deterministic MLP baseline. Our experiments expose a trade-off between predictive multimodality and control performance in this setup. Code is available at https://github.com/Kit115/ValueDiffusionWorldModels.
Christopher Lindenberg, Kashyap Chitta
University of Tübingen, Germany · 2KE:SAI – Kyutai ELLIS Scalable Autonomous Intelligence, Germany
State-of-the-art model-based Reinforcement Learning (RL) approaches either use gradient-free, population-based methods for planning, learned policy networks, or a combination of policy networks and planning. Hybrid approaches that combine Model Predictive Control (MPC) with a learned model and a policy prior to leverage the advantages of both paradigms have shown promising results. However, these approaches typically rely on gradient-free optimization methods, which can be computationally expensive for high-dimensional control tasks. While gradient-based methods are a promising alternative, recent works have empirically shown that gradient-based methods often perform worse than their gradient-free counterparts. We propose Dream-MPC, a novel approach that generates few candidate trajectories from a rolled-out policy and optimizes each trajectory by gradient ascent using a learned world model, uncertainty regularization and amortization of optimization iterations over time by reusing previously optimized actions. Our results on 24 continuous control tasks show that Dream-MPC can significantly improve the performance of the underlying policy and can outperform gradient-free MPC and state-of-the-art baselines. Code and videos are available at https://dream-mpc.github.io.
Jonathan Spieler, Sven Behnke
Autonomous Intelligent Systems, Computer Science Institute VI - Intelligent Systems and Robotics, Center for Robotics and the Lamarr Institute for Machine Learning and Artificial Intelligence, University of Bonn, Germany.