Automatic Cause Determination in Road Scene Understanding Using Qualitative Reasoning and Four-Valued Logic

Reasoning is a promising route to the generalization that autonomous driving requires in the long tail, as it can infer how the elements of a scene depend on one another and traverse those dependencies to conclusions beyond what is observed. Yet it is hard to tell whether a model's conclusions follow the scene's dependencies, because no driving representation makes them explicit enough to test against. Text-based reasoning traces lack spatio-temporal grounding, spatio-temporal scene graphs lack causal links, and reasoning annotations at scale are increasingly model-generated and hard to verify. To this end, we introduce CASCADE (Causal Spatio-Temporal Analysis of Driving Environments), which encompasses two components: (1) a structured scene representation for reasoning in driving scenes and (2) a human-annotated dataset built on it. For every actor that interacts with the ego vehicle, the CASCADE representation records frame-by-frame, for as long as the actor is visible, what action is taken, where it occurs, and how it depends on the actions and states of others. The resulting structure makes reasoning predictions machine-verifiable: they can be scored against it element by element, without relying on (M)LLM judges. The CASCADE dataset provides comprehensive human annotations for 2,066 driving clips of the PhysicalAI dataset, with over 34K elements that establish the spatio-temporal and causal context of each scene, including 8.6K time-stamped ego and agent actions, 3.7K causal links and 2.9K potential influences, and 6.1K annotations for agents, objects, traffic lights, and environments. Being entirely human-annotated, CASCADE provides the reference for this comparison: benchmarking the reasoning abilities of Physical AI models, and verifying the quality of automatically generated reasoning labels. The CASCADE dataset is available at https://huggingface.co/datasets/nvidia/cascade.

Vision-Language-Action (VLA) models for autonomous driving produce natural-language reasoning alongside predicted trajectories, but whether this reasoning reflects the causal structure of the scene remains untested. We introduce CausalDriveBench, an evaluation framework grounded in Pearl's Causal Hierarchy (PCH) that tests causal reasoning in driving-specific VLAs through structured visual question answering (QA) and alternative-trajectory prediction. To this end, we construct causal scene graphs over nuScenes that distinguish causally active, dormant, and distractor entities, separating perceptual salience from causal relevance. The benchmark spans all four rungs of PCH (association, intervention, and counterfactual along with causal discovery) for QA generation. For the higher rungs, we additionally provide reference trajectories under specified scene modifications, enabling action-level verification that complements reasoning-level evaluation. In total, the benchmark contains 7,285 verified causal QA pairs and 1,000 counterfactual trajectories derived from nuScenes. We evaluate 10 driving-specific VLAs and 3 general-purpose VLMs, and report three findings. First, the best model reaches only 70.6% QA accuracy, and 4 of 13 models score below random chance. Second, comparing each driving VLA to the general-purpose VLM that shares its language backbone, the cost of driving fine-tuning ranges from 2 to 34 percentage points on causal QA, with post-training design explaining the spread. Third, causal QA and trajectory accuracy are statistically uncorrelated across models: under counterfactual prompts, predicted trajectories either over-react or collapse onto the observed-scene baseline. Taken together, these results show that neither fluent rationales nor accurate observed-scene trajectories constitute evidence of causal understanding.

Autonomous-driving question answering requires reasoning over structured scene information, yet existing vision-language approaches largely delegate heterogeneous reasoning operations to a single neural inference process. We argue that this uniform strategy overlooks a fundamental distinction: some queries admit exact symbolic solutions, while others require semantic interpretation. We introduce a query-adaptive neuro-symbolic reasoning framework that explicitly allocates computation according to the nature of the query. At its core is a hierarchical Spatiotemporal Scene Graph (STSG) that separates persistent object identities from frame-specific states and represents spatial relations and temporal transitions as explicit directed structures. Given a query, a symbolic executor first attempts to resolve it through exact graph operations; only when symbolic execution abstains is an LLM invoked for semantic reasoning. For these unresolved queries, query-conditioned graph retrieval and evidence filtering preserve relation direction, temporal locality, and object semantics, providing the LLM with compact and verified task-relevant evidence. This design shifts the role of the LLM from a universal reasoning engine to a targeted semantic reasoner, while allowing deterministic computation to be handled exactly and efficiently. We evaluate the framework on 5,916 NuScenes-QA questions across all ten scenes of nuScenes v1.0-mini under an oracle-perception setting. The complete system achieves 80.63 percent overall accuracy with GPT-5.4-mini, improving over the corresponding LLM-only configuration by 5.48 percentage points; with DeepSeek-V4-Flash, the improvement reaches 6.64 points. The largest gains occur on counting questions, with improvements of 10.20 and 12.61 points, respectively. These results show that selective reasoning improves both accuracy and inference efficiency.