What Do Latent Predictive Vehicle Representations Retain? Measuring State, Geometry, and Local Response
On the map: World models → Latent predictive world models
Abstract (arXiv)
Models of vehicle dynamics learned from logged states and commands complement physics-based models, and latent world models, which predict in a learned representation, are used to plan and train controllers in other domains. Vehicle controllers are usually specified in physical terms: costs, limits, and references depend on position, yaw angle, speed, and yaw rate, and the optimizer compares or differentiates predicted outcomes across nearby commands. A latent model placed in such a controller must therefore let these quantities be recovered and must change its predictions with commands as the vehicle does, and prediction error on its own latent targets measures neither. We contribute a measurement protocol for action-conditioned latent predictors with a physical readout that separately tests retention, physical-neighborhood organization, forecasting, and local response to command perturbations, using an untrained-encoder reference and three matched response paths that locate errors in the representation or the predictor. In a case study of a temporal joint-embedding predictive model trained on signals logged in IPG CarMaker, the representations retain the measured planar outputs, though an untrained encoder of the same architecture retains them slightly better; future-command input improves one-second forecasts with retention nearly unchanged; and responses to small command pulses diverge from the simulator already in latent coordinates, raising regret when choosing among nearby commands in all comparisons. Updating the predictor on responses corrects them locally at a cost in forecast accuracy. Measuring retention, forecasting, and local response separately is thus what qualifies a predictive latent as a candidate model for control, and the protocol provides the basis for its closed-loop evaluation.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Latent predictive world models, one of 11 directions in World models. Builds on 6 of its 34 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 26 Sep 2026.
Builds on
6 of 34 references.
Closest ancestors · 2
Same direction, newest first
- 2026What Can Latent World Models Know? Physical Parameter Identifiability in Multimodal Predictive Representations29 Jul
- 2026LeWorldModel: Stable End-to-End Joint-Embedding Predictive Architecture from Pixels13 Mar
Other references · 4
- 2025LeJEPA: Provable and Scalable Self-Supervised Learning Without the Heuristicscited by 227
- 2025TD-JEPA: Latent-predictive Representations for Zero-Shot Reinforcement Learningcited by 17
- 2025Joint Embeddings Go Temporalcited by 8
- 2024Vehicle single track modeling using physics guided neural differential equationscited by 2
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026Latent World Models for Automated Driving: A Unified Taxonomy, Evaluation Framework, and Open Challenges
- 2026Kinematics-Aware Latent World Models for Data-Efficient Autonomous Driving
- 2026JEPA-x: Cross-Predictive Physics Grounding for Forecastable Latent Dynamics
- 2026DA-WAM: Decision-Aligned Future Latents for Driving World Models
- 2026Is Forward Prediction Enough? Physical State Grounding for JEPA World Models
- 2025How Well Do Latent World Models Understand Partially Observable Safety Constraints?
- 2026WALT: Learning World-Model-Aligned Latent Trajectories for Autonomous Driving
- 2026Directed Temporal Representations for Offline Visual Control