ETA-VLA: Efficient Token Adaptation via Temporal Fusion and Intra-LLM Sparsification for Vision-Language-Action Models
Organizations: Bosch Corporate Research, Bosch (China) Investment Ltd., Shanghai, China. · School of Communication and Information Engineering, Shanghai University, Shanghai, China
Abstract
The integration of Vision-Language-Action (VLA) models into autonomous driving systems offers a unified framework for interpreting complex scenes and executing control commands. However, the necessity to incorporate historical multi-view frames for accurate temporal reasoning imposes a severe computational burden, primarily driven by the quadratic complexity of self-attention mechanisms in Large Language Models (LLMs). To alleviate this bottleneck, we propose ETA-VLA, an Efficient Token Adaptation framework for VLA models. ETA-VLA processes the past frames of multi-view images and introduces a novel Intra-LLM Sparse Aggregator (ILSA). Drawing inspiration from human driver attention allocation, ILSA dynamically identifies and prunes redundant visual tokens guided by textual queries and temporal consistency. Specifically, we utilize a text-guided scoring mechanism alongside a diversity-preserving sparsification strategy to select a sparse subset of critical tokens, ensuring comprehensive awareness of the driving scene. Extensive experiments on the NAVSIM v2 demonstrate that ETA-VLA achieves driving performance comparable to state-of-the-art baselines while reducing computational FLOPs by approximately 32%. Notably, our method prunes 85% of visual tokens and reduces inference FLOPs by 61%, but still retaining 94% of the original accuracy on the NAVSIM v2 benchmark.
Figures & tables
| Method | NC | DAC | DDC | TL | EP | TTC | LK | HC | EC | EPDMS |
| Human Agent | 100 | 100 | 99.8 | 100 | 87.4 | 100 | 100 | 98.1 | 90.1 | 90.3 |
| Transfuser [ 4 ] | 96.9 | 89.9 | 97.8 | 99.7 | 87.1 | 95.4 | 92.7 | 98.3 | 87.2 | 76.7 |
| VADv2 [ 3 ] | 97.3 | 91.7 | 77.6 | 92.7 | 100 | 99.9 | 98.2 | 66.0 | 97.4 | 76.6 |
| HydraMDP++ [ 15 ] | 97.2 | 97.5 | 99.4 | 99.6 | 83.1 | 96.5 | 94.4 | 98.2 | 70.9 | 81.4 |
| GTRS [ 16 ] | 97.6 | 98.5 | 99.5 | 99.9 | 89.5 | 97.2 | 96.8 | 97.2 | 57.2 | 84.0 |
| GTRS w/ SimScale [ 21 ] | 98.4 | 98.8 | 99.4 | 99.9 | 87.9 | 98.1 | 96.4 | 97.6 | 58.8 | 84.6 |
| Method | Stage | NC | DAC | DDC | TLC | EP | TTC | LK | HC | EC | EPDMS |
| PDM-Closed [ 5 ] | Stage 1 Stage 2 | 94.4 88.1 | 98.8 90.6 | 100 96.3 | 99.5 98.5 | 100 100 | 93.5 83.1 | 99.3 73.7 | 87.7 91.5 | 36.0 25.4 | 51.3 |
| Transfuser [ 4 ] | Stage 1 Stage 2 | 96.2 77.7 | 79.5 70.2 | 99.1 84.2 | 99.5 98.0 | 84.1 85.1 | 95.1 75.6 | 94.2 45.4 | 97.5 95.7 | 79.1 75.9 | 23.1 |
| DiffusionDrive [ 18 ] | Stage 1 Stage 2 | 95.9 79.5 | 84.0 72.8 | 98.6 84.1 | 99.8 98.4 | 84.4 87.5 | 96.0 76.2 | 95.1 46.6 | 97.6 96.1 | 71.1 62.4 | 26.0 |
| Senna-E2E [ 12 ] | Stage 1 Stage 2 | 95.6 78.6 | 86.0 74.8 | 98.9 84.8 | 99.6 98.2 | 83.9 88.2 | 95.1 75.7 | 95.3 46.9 | 97.6 96.0 | 75.6 65.8 | 27.2 |
| GTRS w/ SimScale [ 21 ] | Stage 1 Stage 2 | 99.1 92.3 | 98.2 93.8 | 99.8 94.9 | 100 99.3 | 71.9 75.4 | 99.3 90.7 | 95.6 60.3 | 93.8 95.9 | 28.0 37.4 | 47.2 |
| ETA-VLA (Ours) | Stage 1 Stage 2 | 98.9 86.7 | 98.4 82.7 | 99.3 90.0 | 99.6 98.7 | 85.2 85.0 | 99.1 83.4 | 99.1 55.9 | 97.8 96.9 | 73.3 63.4 | 48.0 |
| ILSA | Sparse Layers | Pruning Rate | GFLOPs | EPDMS |
| w/o | / | / | 9,105 | 84.8 |
| w/ | 2 | 35% | 6,091 | 84.4 |
| w/ | 2 | 60% | 4,773 | 82.8 |
| w/ | 2 | 85% | 3,556 | 79.8 |
| w/ | 4 | 35% | 6,190 | 85.0 |
| w/ | 4 | 60% | 4,963 | 84.7 |
| Temporal Fusion | Pruning & Recycling Ours Random HoloV SparseVLM | NC | DAC | DDC | TL | EP | TTC | LK | HC | EC | EPDMS |
| ✗ | ✓ | 97.3 | 92.1 | 98.7 | 99.8 | 81.9 | 96.3 | 94.6 | 98.3 | 68.7 | 77.2 |
| ✓ | ✓ | 93.1 | 77.9 | 92.7 | 99.6 | 86.0 | 91.5 | 89.4 | 98.3 | 65.4 | 64.0 |
| ✓ | ✓ | 97.3 | 94.5 | 99.1 | 99.8 | 83.5 | 96.3 | 95.4 | 98.3 | 66.7 | 79.7 |
| ✓ | ✓ | 98.9 | 95.7 | 99.3 | 99.9 | 86.8 | 98.0 | 97.2 | 98.3 | 63.0 | 83.3 |
| ✓ | ✓ | 99.6 | 99.1 | 99.7 | 99.9 | 89.2 | 99.4 | 98.9 | 98.4 | 66.0 | 85.0 |