Vision-Language World Models for Risk-Aware Decision Making in Autonomous Driving

Authors

  • Aarav Yadav School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR, USA.
  • Matteo R. Lindgren Department of Computer Science, Binghamton University, Binghamton, NY, USA.
  • Lars Murray Department of Computer Science and Engineering, University at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, USA.
  • Edwin M. Peters Department of Computer Science, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH, USA.

Keywords:

autonomous driving; vision-language models; world models; risk-aware decision making; socio-technical systems

Abstract

Autonomous driving has increasingly moved from modular perception-planning pipelines toward learned systems that must operate under profound uncertainty. Vision-language world models offer a promising mechanism for anticipating future states, interpreting traffic situations through natural language, and supporting risk-aware decisions. This paper examines their role from a systems perspective, focusing on architectural trade-offs, data infrastructure, operational deployment, and governance rather than narrowly algorithmic improvements. We argue that unifying visual understanding, language-grounded reasoning, and predictive generation changes the nature of risk assessment because the model can represent counterfactual futures, contextualize ambiguous observations, and explain potential conflicts in human-interpretable terms. However, these capabilities introduce structural challenges including calibration of multimodal uncertainty, integration with existing safety cases, and dependence on large heterogeneous datasets. We discuss how reinforcement learning, generative modeling, and instruction tuning can be coupled to improve decision quality under uncertainty while preserving oversight. The analysis covers robustness against distribution shift and adversarial perturbation, fairness across road users and environments, sustainability of large-scale training, and the policy implications of deploying such models in public infrastructure. We conclude that vision-language world models should be treated as socio-technical control systems rather than isolated perception modules. Their adoption requires continuous monitoring, standardized evaluation across risk dimensions, transparent documentation, and regulatory alignment with existing vehicle safety frameworks. The paper contributes a cross-disciplinary synthesis of architecture, governance, and deployment concerns intended to inform researchers, engineers, and policymakers.

References

1. LeCun, Y., Bengio, Y., & Hinton, G. (2015). Deep learning. Nature, 521(7553), 436–444.

2. Vaswani, A., Shazeer, N., Parmar, N., Uszkoreit, J., Jones, L., Gomez, A. N., ... & Polosukhin, I. (2017). Attention is all you need. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 30.

3. Bommasani, R., Hudson, D. A., Adeli, E., Altman, R., Arora, S., von Arx, S., ... & Liang, P. (2021). On the opportunities and risks of foundation models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2108.07258.

4. Radford, A., Kim, J. W., Hallacy, C., Ramesh, A., Goh, G., Agarwal, S., ... & Sutskever, I. (2021). Learning transferable visual models from natural language supervision. Proceedings of the 38th International Conference on Machine Learning, 8748–8763.

5. Brown, T. B., Mann, B., Ryder, N., Subbiah, M., Kaplan, J., Dhariwal, P., ... & Amodei, D. (2020). Language models are few-shot learners. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 33, 1877–1901.

6. Ho, J., Jain, A., & Abbeel, P. (2020). Denoising diffusion probabilistic models. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 33, 6840–6851.

7. Goodfellow, I., Pouget-Abadie, J., Mirza, M., Xu, B., Warde-Farley, D., Ozair, S., ... & Bengio, Y. (2014). Generative adversarial nets. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 27.

8. Mnih, V., Kavukcuoglu, K., Silver, D., Rusu, A. A., Veness, J., Bellemare, M. G., ... & Hassabis, D. (2015). Human-level control through deep reinforcement learning. Nature, 518(7540), 529–533.

9. Silver, D., Huang, A., Maddison, C. J., Guez, A., Sifre, L., van den Driessche, G., ... & Hassabis, D. (2016). Mastering the game of Go with deep neural networks and tree search. Nature, 529(7587), 484–489.

10. Schulman, J., Wolski, F., Dhariwal, P., Radford, A., & Klimov, O. (2017). Proximal policy optimization algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:1707.06347.

11. Bojarski, M., Del Testa, D., Dworakowski, D., Firner, B., Flepp, B., Goyal, P., ... & Zieba, K. (2016). End to end learning for self-driving cars. arXiv preprint arXiv:1604.07316.

12. Codevilla, F., Müller, M., López, A., Koltun, V., & Dosovitskiy, A. (2018). Exploring limitations of behavior cloning for autonomous driving. IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), 5185–5190.

13. Kendall, A., & Gal, Y. (2017). What uncertainties do we need in Bayesian deep learning for computer vision? Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 30, 5574–5584.

14. Eykholt, K., Evtimov, I., Fernandes, E., Li, B., Rahmati, A., Xiao, C., ... & Song, D. (2018). Robust physical-world attacks on deep learning visual classification. Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 1625–1634.

15. Caesar, H., Bankiti, V., Lang, A. H., Vora, S., Liong, V. E., Xu, Q., ... & Beijbom, O. (2020). nuScenes: A multimodal dataset for autonomous driving. Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 11621–11631.

16. Sun, P., Kretzschmar, H., Dotiwalla, X., Chouard, A., Patnaik, V., Tsui, P., ... & Anguelov, D. (2020). Scalability in perception for autonomous driving: Waymo open dataset. Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2446–2454.

17. Xiong, Z., Ye, X., Yaman, B., Cheng, S., Lu, Y., Luo, J., ... & Ren, L. (2026). UniDrive-WM: Unified understanding, planning and generation world model for autonomous driving. arXiv preprint arXiv:2601.04453.

18. Amodei, D., Olah, C., Steinhardt, J., Christiano, P., Schulman, J., & Mané, D. (2016). Concrete problems in AI safety. arXiv preprint arXiv:1606.06565.

19. Ouyang, L., Wu, J., Jiang, X., Almeida, D., Wainwright, C. L., Mishkin, P., ... & Lowe, R. (2022). Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 35, 27730–27744.

20. Wei, J., Wang,X., Schuurmans, D., Bosma, M., Ichter, B., Xia, F., Chi, E., Le, Q., & Zhou, D. (2022). Chain-of-thought prompting elicits reasoning in large language models. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 35, 24824–24837.

21. Jobin, A., Ienca, M., & Vayena, E. (2019). The global landscape of AI ethics guidelines. Nature Machine Intelligence, 1(9), 389–399.

22. Floridi, L., Cowls, J., Beltrametti, M., Chatila, R., Chazerand, P., Dignum, V., ... & Schafer, B. (2018). AI4People—An ethical framework for a good AI society: Opportunities, risks, principles, and recommendations. Minds and Machines, 28(4), 689–707.

Downloads

Published

2026-06-26