Diffusion-Based Planning for Autonomous Driving with Flexible Guidance
Yinan Zheng, Ruiming Liang, Kexin Zheng, Jinliang Zheng, Liyuan Mao,, Jianxiong Li, Weihao Gu, Rui Ai, Shengbo Eben Li, Xianyuan Zhan, Jingjing Liu

TL;DR
This paper introduces a transformer-based diffusion planning model for autonomous driving that models multi-modal behaviors, ensures safety, and outperforms existing methods on large-scale benchmarks.
Contribution
A novel diffusion-based planning approach that jointly models prediction and planning, enabling safe, flexible, and human-like driving behaviors without rule-based refinement.
Findings
Achieves state-of-the-art performance on nuPlan benchmark.
Demonstrates robust transferability across diverse driving styles.
Effectively models multi-modal driving behaviors.
Abstract
Achieving human-like driving behaviors in complex open-world environments is a critical challenge in autonomous driving. Contemporary learning-based planning approaches such as imitation learning methods often struggle to balance competing objectives and lack of safety assurance,due to limited adaptability and inadequacy in learning complex multi-modal behaviors commonly exhibited in human planning, not to mention their strong reliance on the fallback strategy with predefined rules. We propose a novel transformer-based Diffusion Planner for closed-loop planning, which can effectively model multi-modal driving behavior and ensure trajectory quality without any rule-based refinement. Our model supports joint modeling of both prediction and planning tasks under the same architecture, enabling cooperative behaviors between vehicles. Moreover, by learning the gradient of the trajectory score…
Peer Reviews
Decision·ICLR 2025 Oral
S1. Reduces complexity issue by collectively considering the status of key participants in the driving scenario and jointly modeling the motion prediction and closed-loop planning tasks as a future trajectory generation task. S2. Integrating closed-loop planning with a diffusion model is an effective approach, and the use of the architecture is clearly articulated.
W1. Though PLUTO (hybrid method) performs better than Diffusion Planner in the NuPlan dataset, no comparison with PLUTO w or w/o refine is shown for the delivery-vehicle driving dataset. W2. The paper would benefit from a more explicit and detailed statement of contributions, perhaps in a dedicated paragraph near the end of the introduction. This should clearly outline how the Diffusion Planner addresses each of the limitations mentioned and what specific novel aspects it introduces. Minor Nit
The strengths of the paper are threefold. 1. The use of diffusion models in the autonomous driving planning task is novel. The authors effectively address the limitations of existing learning-based planning methods, such as handling multi-modal behaviors and out-of-distribution scenarios. 2. The paper provides a thorough explanation of the Diffusion Planner’s architecture and how it integrates prediction and planning tasks. The classifier guidance mechanism for adaptable planning behaviors is
The overall quality of this paper is strong. One minor area for improvement is the quantity of simulation benchmarks used. The paper evaluates planner performance solely based on the Test14 random benchmark, which consists of approximately 280 closed-loop scenarios. It would be beneficial to include additional simulation benchmarks from nuPlan, such as the Val14 benchmark and the Test14 hard benchmark, to provide a more comprehensive demonstration of the advantages of the proposed method over th
1. A novel diffusion-based framework in solving the motion planning task. Intutive DiT-enabled framework for integrated prediction and planning with costs guidance. 2. Strong planning results delivered against state-of-the-art baselines in nuPlan.
1. Insufficient benchmark and metric comparison: 1) Additional results in other popular benchmark, such as Val14 and Test14-Hard are required to manifest the planning results under more diversed / challenging scenarios. 2) Other settings, such as closed loop reactive simulation, and open loop results are not verified. 2. Insufficient baseline comparison. Motion planning / trajectory simulation leveraging diffuision are not novel. Hence, the planning results using other diffusion strategies ([1]
Code & Models
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsRobotic Path Planning Algorithms · Control and Dynamics of Mobile Robots · Aerospace Engineering and Control Systems
MethodsDiffusion
