Shift & Drift: A Zero-Shot Benchmark for Generalizable and Robust Autonomous Driving Motion Planning
Authors: Alessandro Canevaro, Hang Yu, Julian Schmidt, Peizheng Li, Silvan Lindner, Wilhelm Stork, Georg Martius, Julian Jordan
Abstract
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.
High-level autonomous driving requires motion planners capable of modeling multimodal future uncertainties while remaining robust in closed-loop interactions. Although diffusion-based planners are effective at modeling complex trajectory distributions, they often suffer from stochastic instabilities and the lack of corrective negative feedback when trained purely with imitation learning. To address these issues, we propose RAD-2, a unified generator-discriminator framework for closed-loop planning. Specifically, a diffusion-based generator is used to produce diverse trajectory candidates, while an RL-optimized discriminator reranks these candidates according to their long-term driving quality. This decoupled design avoids directly applying sparse scalar rewards to the full high-dimensional trajectory space, thereby improving optimization stability. To further enhance reinforcement learning, we introduce Temporally Consistent Group Relative Policy Optimization, which exploits temporal coherence to alleviate the credit assignment problem. In addition, we propose On-policy Generator Optimization, which converts closed-loop feedback into structured longitudinal optimization signals and progressively shifts the generator toward high-reward trajectory manifolds. To support efficient large-scale training, we introduce BEV-Warp, a high-throughput simulation environment that performs closed-loop evaluation directly in Bird's-Eye View feature space via spatial warping. RAD-2 reduces the collision rate by 56% compared with strong diffusion-based planners. Real-world deployment further demonstrates improved perceived safety and driving smoothness in complex urban traffic.
Safe and explainable motion planning remains a central challenge in autonomous driving. While rule-based planners offer predictable and explainable behavior, they often fail to grasp the complexity and uncertainty of real-world traffic. Conversely, learned planners exhibit strong adaptability but suffer from reduced transparency and occasional safety violations. We introduce Mosaic, a framework for structured decision-making that integrates both paradigms through arbitration graphs. By decoupling trajectory verification and selection from the generation of trajectories by individual planners, every decision becomes transparent and traceable. This separation lets verification and trajectory selection contribute independently: centralized verification acts as a safety floor, reducing at-fault collisions from 25 for each standalone planner to 16. In contrast, per-step trajectory selection acts as a performance ceiling, combining the complementary strengths of a rule-based and a learned planner. In experimental evaluation on nuPlan, Mosaic achieves 95.56 CLS-NR and 94.18 CLS-R on the Val14 closed-loop benchmark, setting a new state of the art. On the interPlan benchmark, focused on highly interactive and out-of-distribution scenarios, Mosaic scores 54.10 CLS-R, outperforming its best constituent planner by 22.8% -- all without retraining or requiring additional data. The code is available at github.com/KIT-MRT/mosaic.
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.