Simulation-to-real driving video diffusion models can translate photorealistic scenes, but they typically represent pedestrians and cyclists, vulnerable road users (VRUs), as generic object classes. This is insufficient for vulnerable road users whose safety-relevant appearance depends on articulated pose and identity. We present BodyBridge and Grounded Body Layers (GBL), a simulator-derived, pixel-aligned representation that combines scene geometry, canonical per-pixel body correspondence, and exact VRU masks. GBL provides explicit articulation to the video diffusion model, emphasizes VRU regions during control-branch post-training, and supports additive composition with scene-geometry control at inference. It also enables per-joint evaluation of generated VRUs and a failure taxonomy for identity errors. On CARLA-to-real translation, BodyBridge improves near-range [email protected] by 22% over the released depth-conditioned baseline. Replacing normal-map body control with canonical correspondence reduces body flips by 18%, while composition reduces near-range facing flips by 27%. These results show that explicit body grounding complements scene-level control and improves pose-faithful VRU generation. All code, data, and model checkpoints will be made publicly available to support reproducible, pedestrian-aware autonomous driving research.
Figures & tables
Figure 2: BodyBridge: Grounded body control for sim-to-real video generation. (1) Grounded Body Layers encode scene geometry, canonical body correspondence, and the VRU mask from simulation. (2) The correspondence layer, encoded in RGB, trains a dedicated body-control branch, with the mask weighting the training objective. (3) At inference, body and released geometry control are composed to generate the translated video. Green denotes evaluation ground truth only, amber the objective and its weighting, and blue BodyBridge-specific and trained components; padlocks indicate frozen modules.
Figure 3: Qualitative sim-to-real results with BodyBridge. Examples across diverse scenes and pedestrian configurations show appearance translation while retaining the simulator-specified VRU pose and scene placement. Green boxes mark the highlighted VRUs; insets compare the source simulator crop ( Sim ) with the corresponding BodyBridge generation ( BB ).
Method
Recov. ↑
PCK all ↑
Near ↑
NMJE ↓
KID ↓
Cosmos depth
.504
.308
.666
.380
217.2
BodyBridge
.493
.373
.812
.282
139.3
Table 1: BodyBridge vs. scene-geometry control. Pose fidelity is evaluated against exact simulator ground truth; KID VRU is reported as ×103 .
Variant
Recov. ↑
PCK all ↑
Near ↑
NMJE ↓
Body representation
Edge (training-free)
.212
.136
.492
.360
2D skeleton
.320
.184
.595
.461
Normal map
.414
.310
.796
.281
Canonical corr.
.431
.325
.805
.291
Stage 2: post-training
Table 2: Component ablation. Effects of body representation, weighted post-training, and geometry-body composition.
Figure 4: Generation-induced VRU pose failures by failure type. Near-range failures are shown relative to the untranslated sim-RGB estimator floor. Identity-related failures-flip, switch, and merge-account for most of the excess errors, while canonical correspondence reduces the flip component compared with the normal-map representation.
Figure 5: Near-range VRU facing-direction errors. Points show front/back flip rates among recovered instances; error bars denote 95% clip-bootstrap CIs and the green line marks the untranslated sim-RGB estimator floor. Canonical correspondence reduces facing flips relative to the normal map, both alone ( −21.6% ) and when composed with depth ( −27.2% ).
Figure S1 : Matched qualitative examples of taxonomy-defined articulation failures. Columns show representative flip , switch , and stump cases. The top row shows the corresponding simulator ground truth, the middle row the released Cosmos depth-control baseline, and the bottom row BodyBridge. The examples illustrate how the taxonomy manifests visually under matched source states. Reported failure frequencies are computed over the full evaluation set rather than from these examples.
Configuration
s42
s43
s44
Mean
Cosmos depth
.666
.696
.655
.673
Normal map
.796
.793
.789
.793
Canonical corr.
.805
.802
.795
.800
Depth + normal map
.808
.819
.791
.806
BodyBridge
.812
.828
.803
.814
Table S1 : Inference-seed replication. Near-range [email protected] for three inference seeds with trained checkpoints held fixed.
Training run
Near PCK ↑
Flip red. ↑
Facing red. ↑
Original
.805
18.4%
21.6%
Replica 1
.771
24.2%
17.4%
Replica 2
.779
20.8%
13.0%
Table S2 : Training-run replication. Near-range [email protected] and relative identity-error reductions for three independently trained canonical-correspondence branches. The reduction columns compare canonical correspondence with normal-map conditioning under the same evaluation protocol.
Configuration
All ↑
Near ↑
Mid ↑
Far ↑
Cosmos depth
.504
.906
.640
.229
Normal map
.414
.943
.561
.082
Canonical corr.
.431
.938
.575
.109
Depth + normal map
.486
.955
.663
.146
BodyBridge
.493
.943
.677
.167
Table S3 : Distance-stratified instance recovery. Fraction of scorable GT VRUs recovered under the top-down evaluation protocol.
Threshold
Δ PCK
95% CI
α=.5
+.146
[+.097, +.195]
α=.2
+.148
[+.101, +.187]
α=.1
+.069
[+.045, +.088]
Table S4 : PCK-threshold sensitivity. Paired near-range PCK difference between BodyBridge and the released depth-control baseline. Positive values favor BodyBridge.
Distance
IoU ↑
RMS [px] ↓
RMS [% height] ↓
Near
.685 [.652,.710]
3.1
3.7
Mid
.645 [.628,.659]
1.5
3.8
Far
.581 [.564,.597]
0.8
3.3
Table S5 : Registration and conditioning-geometry audit. Visible-mask IoU compares the registered body render with the simulator actor mask. Joint reprojection RMS is reported in pixels and relative to apparent body height.
Table S6 : Pose fidelity and downstream detection. Near-range [email protected] is measured on each generated-data variant. Detector gains are means over six YOLO11-s training seeds relative to the corresponding same-seed real-only baseline. All variants use identical augmentation frames and GT boxes. Rows are ordered by Δ AP@[.5:.95].
School of Vehicle and Mobility, Tsinghua University · Carnegie Mellon University · State Key Laboratory of Intelligent Green Vehicle and Mobility, Tsinghua University