# From Proxy Learning to Driving Decisions: A Transfer-Based Framework for Evaluating Future-Aware Autonomous Driving Planners

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.02688 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.02688/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in World models for autonomous driving, one of 11 directions in World models.
- Builds on 7 of its 38 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 2 Sep 2026.

## Placed in

- World models / [World models for autonomous driving](https://mlsanity.com/wm/world-models-for-autonomous-driving/)
- End-to-end autonomous driving / [Imitation-learning end-to-end planners](https://mlsanity.com/driving/imitation-learning-end-to-end-planners/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 7 of 7)

- [GAIA-1: A Generative World Model for Autonomous Driving](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.17080/) (2023)
- [NuPlan: A closed-loop ML-based planning benchmark for autonomous vehicles](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2106.11810/) (2021)
- [DriveDreamer: Towards Real-world-driven World Models for Autonomous Driving](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.09777/) (2023)
- [Rethinking the Open-Loop Evaluation of End-to-End Autonomous Driving in nuScenes](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.10430/) (2023)
- [Pseudo-Simulation for Autonomous Driving](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.04218/) (2025)
- [Drive-JEPA: Video JEPA Meets Multimodal Trajectory Distillation for End-to-End Driving](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.22032/) (2026)
- [ProDrive: Proactive Planning for Autonomous Driving via Ego-Environment Co-Evolution](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.25329/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Future-aware representations and world models are increasingly used in proposal-based autonomous-driving planners to improve trajectory selection. However, improvements in proxy objectives or restricted subsets are often interpreted as planning gains without verifying proposal ordering, selected trajectories, full-scale utility, and critical driving components. We propose the Proxy-to-Decision Transfer (PDT) Framework, an analysis framework that evaluates when learned future information supports a reliable driving-performance improvement claim. Its Decision-Transfer Decomposition Module localizes value loss through score margins, switch-conditioned utility, and support-versus-selection regret. Its Reliability-Constrained Validation Module requires exact pairing, a minimum meaningful effect, scale-expanded confirmation, safety non-compensation, sequential comparability, and family-level robustness. On a representative future-aware planner evaluated with NAVSIM-v1, component BCE decreases from 0.705 to 0.530 while held selected PDM decreases from 0.963 to 0.961. A separate candidate improves a 512-record prefix by 0.00909, with a scene-bootstrap 95% interval of [0.000744, 0.0177], but its 2048-record and complete-support intervals include zero. A proposal-level replay further confirms the switch-utility decomposition, yet none of 432 screened configurations passes the two-half, two-seed robustness gate. PDT therefore identifies where decision transfer fails or remains indeterminate across proxy, subset, aggregate, and selection evidence.