AirPlayground: Benchmarking Aerial Navigation across Diverse Reconstructed Environments
Organizations: Nanyang Technological University · Wuhan University · Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics
Abstract
Large-scale aerial resources provide a foundation for learning navigation across diverse environments. However, existing resources remain limited in providing (1) densely sampled flight demonstrations for learning different policy formulations and (2) broad environment coverage for standardized closed-loop evaluation. To address these limitations, we introduce AirPlayground, a unified benchmark for training and evaluating aerial navigation policies across diverse environments. We first construct 94 photorealistic 3D Gaussian Splatting (3DGS) environments spanning indoor, urban outdoor, and vegetation settings, with aligned collision geometry. Building on these environments, we develop a scene-adaptive pipeline for automated expert flight collection, yielding 94K demonstrations and 46.5M synchronized observation-state-action samples at 50 Hz. We further provide an extensible API that supports training different policy formulations on this shared corpus and evaluating them under unified protocols in the corresponding environments. We benchmark seven baselines spanning four policy paradigms across three navigation settings in seen and unseen environments, and further examine scaling behavior with ACT. Scaling ACT's training corpus from 5 to 70 scenes raises median success rates on seen and unseen environments from 30.6% and 16.8% to 41.2% and 29.4%, respectively. Through this shared training and evaluation framework, AirPlayground supports analysis of how offline prediction errors relate to closed-loop outcomes. Our analyses highlight the roles of prediction errors, execution protocols, and scene interactions in closed-loop performance.
Figures & tables
| Environment | Scale | Flight Experience | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Benchmark | Source | 3DGS | Exec. | Scenes | Traj. | Supervision | Granularity |
| AerialVLN ( Liu et al., 2023 ) | Simulation | – | ✓ | 25 | 8.4K | Discrete 4-DoF | 204 steps/traj. |
| CityNav ( Lee et al., 2025 ) | Real-city scans | – | ✓ | 2 cities | 32.6K | Discrete actions | – |
| OpenUAV ( Wang et al., 2025b ) | Simulation | – | ✓ | 22 | 12.1K | 6-DoF trajectory | 264 steps/traj. |
| OpenFly ( Gao et al., 2026 ) | Mixed | ✓ | Partial | 18 | 100K | Discrete + waypoint | 35 actions/traj. |
| UAV-Flow ( Wang et al., 2025a ) | Real + sim. | – | ✓ | 3 real | 40.8K | 6-DoF state | 5 Hz |
| Seen Offline | Seen Closed Loop | Unseen Offline | Unseen Closed Loop | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Method | ADE | FDE | P95 | Yaw | SR | A ∗ -SPL | CR | OB | ADE | FDE | P95 | Yaw | SR | A ∗ -SPL | CR | OB |
| CNN-BC | 0.54 | 0.81 | 2.52 | 0.0022 | 21.0 | 0.21 | 49.0 | 30.0 | 9.34 | 16.59 | 19.75 | 0.0054 | 15.0 | 0.14 | 47.5 | 37.5 |
| ACT | 1.67 | 3.07 | 16.86 | 0.0096 | 40.8 | 0.41 | 39.2 | 20.0 | 11.84 | 21.55 | 26.68 | 0.0171 | 29.5 | 0.30 | 65.0 | 5.5 |
| DP | 2.88 | 5.38 | 32.98 | 0.0316 | 20.5 | 0.19 | 65.5 | 14.0 | 22.15 | 40.27 | 58.04 | 0.1235 | 11.2 | 0.10 | 48.8 | 40.0 |
| ViNT | 7.11 | 12.81 | 19.85 | 0.0360 | 38.8 | 0.39 | 36.2 | 25.0 | 15.13 | 27.50 | 38.24 | 0.0422 | 33.0 | 0.33 | 64.5 | 2.5 |
| OmniVLA | 4.99 | 8.11 | 15.01 | 0.0454 | 47.5 | 0.47 | 38.8 | 13.7 | 20.64 | 37.95 | 45.58 | 0.0497 | 40.5 | 0.38 | 59.5 | 0.0 |
| Change | FDE (cm) | Expert Pred. (cm) | Closed-loop min. (cm) | Collision | Local pass | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Decrease | 43 | 8.4 | 25.6 18.9 | 5.2 | 16/43 (37.2%) | 25/43 (58.1%) |
| Stable | 76 | 7.9 | 26.2 26.5 | 10.8 | 16/76 (21.1%) | 56/76 (73.7%) |
| Increase | 61 | 8.8 | 25.9 32.1 | 15.7 | 8/61 (13.1%) | 49/61 (80.3%) |
Appendix figures & tables14 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
| Parameter | Reference value |
|---|---|
| Navigable space and task sampling | |
| Planning-grid cell width | m |
| Endpoint candidates | |
| Minimum endpoint separation | m |
| Additional endpoint-clearance margin | m |
| Endpoint distance-quantile filter | |
| Scenes | Flight data | Area (m 2 ) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Split | Indoor | Urban outdoor | Vegetation | Total | Trajectories | Min–max |
| Training | 11 | 38 | 21 | 70 | 70,000 | 23–6,674 |
| Validation | 3 | 3 | 2 | 8 | 8,000 | 14–1,640 |
| Unseen test | 4 | 7 | 5 | 16 | 16,000 | 118–4,543 |
| Total | 18 | 48 | 28 | 94 | 94,000 | 14–6,674 |
| Seen | Unseen | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Environment | Spatial structures | Scenes | Area range (m 2 ) | Scenes | Area range (m 2 ) |
| Indoor | Rooms, corridors, open halls | 4 | 80–1,079 | 4 | 118–863 |
| Urban outdoor | Covered passages, streets, plazas | 7 | 200–6,674 | 7 | 502–4,543 |
| Vegetation | Wooded paths, hillside gardens, coastal parks | 5 | 141–1,191 | 5 | 128–1,678 |
| Metric | Definition |
|---|---|
| Motion Direction Error | Angle between predicted and expert net displacements; undefined for zero displacement. |
| Band-limited DTW | Minimum cumulative position distance over monotone alignments, divided by ; band . |
| Lateral / Yaw Direction Error Rate | Opposite-sign fraction for expert lateral displacement m / yaw change rad. Lateral displacement uses the initial body frame. |
| Yaw Error | Absolute wrapped difference between predicted and expert yaw changes at the 0.2 s endpoint, averaged over valid anchors within trajectories, then equally across trajectories within scenes and across scenes. |
| P95 FDE | 95th percentile of anchor-level FDE within each scene, then averaged equally across scenes. |
| Corner FDE | FDE for a angle between the first and last 0.1 s displacements of the next second; both lengths must exceed 0.02 m. |
| Method | RGB history | Native output | Pred. span (s) | Exec. | Deployment adapter |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CNN-BC | 1/1 | 1 control | 0.02 | 1 | Direct / hold |
| ACT | 1/1 | 50 controls | 1.00 | 50 | Prefix |
| DP | 2/1 | 32 controls | 0.64 | 16 | Prefix |
| ViNT | 6/5 | 5 waypoints | 0.50 | 10 | Tracker |
| OmniVLA | 1/1 | 8 poses | 0.16 | 8 | Pose differences / prefix |
| NWM | 4/5 | Future view | 0.80 | 40 | Rank / hold |
| Method | Updates | Batch | Peak LR | Training scope |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CNN-BC | 5,280 | 256 | (1–3) | Full policy |
| ACT | 34,650 | 32 | Full policy | |
| DP | 54,450 | 32 | Full policy | |
| ViNT | 8,418 | 256 | – | Goal modules + decoder |
| OmniVLA | 500 | 32 | (2–5) | LoRA + adapters |
| NWM | 604 | 64 | Full predictor |
| Method | PointGoal | ImageGoal | Goal-free | ||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NE | OSR | SR | SPL | CR | OB | TTS | NE | OSR | SR | SPL | CR | OB | TTS | NE | OSR | SR | SPL | CR | OB | TTS | |
| CNN-BC | 6.44 | 20.8 | 18.0 | 0.18 | 48.2 | 33.8 | 7.21 | 5.60 | 10.2 | 8.3 | 0.07 | 59.2 | 32.5 | 5.49 | 5.84 | 10.5 | 6.9 | 0.06 | 19.8 | 73.3 | 5.46 |
| ACT | 4.38 | 39.1 | 35.1 | 0.35 | 52.1 | 12.7 | 4.74 | 4.08 | 26.7 | 24.8 | 0.22 | 54.3 | 20.9 | 3.21 | 4.34 | 16.4 | 12.1 | 0.10 | 63.5 | 24.4 | 2.42 |
| DP | 7.17 | 26.5 | 15.9 | 0.14 | 57.1 | 27.0 | 5.88 | 4.13 | 24.4 | 20.2 | 0.16 | 52.7 | 27.1 | 3.58 | 4.43 | 16.4 | 13.1 | 0.11 | 60.1 | 26.8 | 3.75 |
| ViNT | 4.94 | 39.0 | 35.9 | 0.36 | 50.4 | 13.7 | 8.05 | 2.20 | 52.1 | 51.1 | 0.48 | 39.7 | 9.2 | 6.01 | 4.36 | 17.1 | 13.4 | 0.11 | 60.8 | 25.8 | 3.45 |
| OmniVLA | 3.81 | 46.5 | 44.0 | 0.43 | 49.1 | 6.9 | 6.83 | 2.00 | 53.8 | 52.3 | 0.47 | 42.8 | 4.9 | 5.44 | 4.08 | 32.6 | 19.6 | 0.15 | 49.4 | 31.0 | 3.74 |
| Clean | Toward | Tangential | Away | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Method | Margin | |||||||||
| ACT | Low | 17 | 30.0 | 0.221 | 30.0 | 0.192 | 32.1 | 0.202 | 20.0 | 0.254 |
| ACT | Medium | 15 | 20.0 | 0.451 | 25.0 | 0.368 | 10.0 | 0.480 | 15.0 | 0.476 |
| ACT | High | 15 | 5.0 | 0.836 | 5.0 | 0.766 | 0.0 | 0.850 | 5.0 | 0.867 |
| NavMorph | Low | 14 | 35.0 | 0.194 | 35.0 | 0.178 | 35.0 | 0.185 | 30.0 | 0.211 |
| NavMorph | Medium | 17 | 15.0 | 0.476 | 15.0 | 0.431 | 10.0 | 0.497 | 15.0 | 0.514 |
UAV Navigation
Unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) navigation develops methods for locating and guiding drones safely through known, unknown, and changing environments.
See all 272 papers