Long-tail scenarios remain a major bottleneck for autonomous driving evaluation, even as datasets grow by orders of magnitude. Existing evaluation pipelines are rarely human-aligned, safety-aware, verifiable, and explainable at the same time: closed-loop metrics often saturate among strong planners, while unstructured human ratings can be noisy without a carefully designed protocol. We formulate planning evaluation as additional-threat detection: given a planner trajectory and an expert reference, does the planner's displacement introduce new unsafe driving behavior? We propose FluidTest, an evaluation pipeline with three components: a pairwise WebUI protocol for reliable human annotation; a taxonomy of 32 semantic threats with evidence-grounded decision graphs; and a three-agent verification system with reflection for precision and auditability. Experiments on the WOD-E2E dataset show that FluidTest produces consistent labels among trained annotators and identifies additional threats in 65% of Poutine trajectories and 51% of RAP trajectories. These results show that state-of-the-art planners can still exhibit substantial safety-relevant failures despite high Rater Feedback Scores (RFS) and low Average Displacement Error (ADE). Additional details, guidance, and code are available at https://fluidtest.web.app.
Evaluating autonomous driving systems in closed-loop settings requires realistic and interactive simulation, yet existing simulators largely rely on log replay or rule-based agents, limiting behavioral diversity and long-tail coverage. We propose an agent-driven simulation framework in which surrounding road participants are controlled by instruction-following large language models through a structured action interface, enabling intentional and reactive behaviors while preserving physical plausibility. Furthermore, we introduce SemanticPlan, a benchmark of closed-loop planning in long-tail and semantically rich scenarios that augment real nuPlan scenes with multiple interactive agents following diverse language instructions. Evaluation results show that state-of-the-art planners still struggle to consistently achieve safe and effective task completion, suggesting that these long-tail scenarios remain challenging.
While closed-loop motion planners trained on large-scale, object-level datasets, e.g., nuPlan, demonstrate strong in-distribution (ID) performance, their generalization to novel urban topologies and recovery mechanisms following execution perturbations remain under-explored. To address this, we present Shift & Drift, a novel dual-track benchmark designed to rigorously stress-test motion planners across two critical axes of distribution shift: (1) The Semantic Shift Track leverages a novel conversion pipeline that transforms the aerial, DeepScenario Open 3D dataset into the nuPlan simulation framework. This enables zero-shot evaluation of planners trained on North American and Singaporean data against 1,182 scenarios spanning four German cities and the US city of San Francisco featuring dense pedestrian-cyclist interactions. (2) The State-Distribution Drift Track injects stochastic perturbations into the ego vehicle's dynamics to quantify robustness against compounding execution errors. Based on this, we systematically evaluate the failure modes of diverse planning paradigms under semantic and state-distribution shifts. While imitation learning methods achieve high scores in ID benchmarks, they exhibit significant failures under semantic shift, particularly in pedestrian-dense environments, and suffer from persistent drift when subjected to temporally correlated actuation noise. In contrast, the evaluated reinforcement-learning-based planner demonstrates more graceful degradation, maintaining higher safety and progress metrics across both tracks. Our findings reveal an empirical trade-off between imitation fidelity and closed-loop resilience, providing the community with a rigorous benchmark to evaluate progress toward reliable deployment.
End-to-end autonomous driving models often encounter performance bottlenecks, as training-time scaling leads to high computational costs and diminishing marginal returns. Existing planners typically adopt a one-shot generation paradigm, lacking secondary validation and active correction mechanisms to detect and revise suboptimal or unsafe trajectories during inference. To address this issue, we propose DriveVer, a lightweight, plug-and-play Test-Time Verifier that leverages the test-time scaling paradigm to enable autonomous driving systems to validate and refine trajectories without costly and heavy training. We construct a dedicated trajectory dataset based on the NAVSIM benchmark through condition-driven clustering and balanced sampling according to ego-vehicle states and navigation commands. Employing a dual-head architecture, DriveVer efficiently fuses candidate trajectories with multi-view visual representations and ego-vehicle kinematic features to simultaneously predict a safety confidence score and an absolute geometric refinement vector. Extensive experiments on the NAVSIM benchmark show that DriveVer significantly improves the performance of base planning models. Notably, as an extremely compact model with only 34M parameters, DriveVer introduces minimal computational overhead, achieving competitive results while maintaining real-time inference efficiency.