DriveLM: Driving with Graph Visual Question Answering
One-line decision
Use this skill when you want to create structured QA data for autonomous driving VLMs using graph-based scene understanding. Avoid it when you do not work with autonomous driving or need general-purpose VQA.
Skill metadata
- Skill type: driving-qa-data-generation
- Paper kind: operational-method
- Actionability: high
- Evidence quality: full_paper
Goal
Create structured visual QA data for autonomous driving by building graph representations of driving scenes and generating questions about perception, prediction, planning, and behavior.
Problem signature
- Modality: driving scene images/videos with structured QA about driving tasks.
- Data state: driving scene data annotated with graph-based QA covering perception, prediction, and planning.
- Scale regime: thousands of driving scenes with comprehensive QA.
- Model requirement: VLM for driving scene understanding; graph annotation pipeline.
Use when
- You need driving-specific visual QA data.
- You want structured reasoning about driving scenes.
- You need perception, prediction, and planning QA.
Do not use when
- You do not work with autonomous driving.
- General VQA is sufficient for your needs.
- You lack driving scene data.
Required inputs
- driving_scenes: Driving scene images/videos from nuScenes or similar.
- graph_annotations: Graph representations of scene objects and relationships.
- qa_templates: Templates for perception, prediction, planning, and behavior questions.
Optional inputs
- 3d_annotations: 3D bounding box and trajectory annotations.
Outputs
- drivelm_qa_data: Structured driving QA dataset.
- driving_vlm: VLM fine-tuned for driving scene understanding.
Assumptions and prerequisites
- Graph-based scene representation enables systematic QA generation.
- Driving tasks can be decomposed into perception, prediction, and planning.
- Structured QA teaches reasoning about driving scenarios.
Procedure
- Build scene graphs
Action: Create graph representations of driving scenes with objects, relationships, and actions.
Why: Graphs provide structured information for QA generation.
Note: See paper for details.
- Generate perception questions
Action: Create questions about what objects are present, their attributes, and locations.
Why: Perception is the foundation of driving understanding.
Note: See paper for details.
- Generate prediction questions
Action: Create questions about what objects will do next.
Why: Prediction is critical for safe driving.
Note: See paper for details.
- Generate planning questions
Action: Create questions about appropriate driving actions.
Why: Planning tests end-to-end driving reasoning.
Note: See paper for details.
- Train driving VLM
Action: Fine-tune a VLM on the generated driving QA data.
Why: Specialized training enables driving scene understanding.
Note: See paper for details.
Parameters to set
- qa_categories — Role: Categories of driving questions. How to set: Include perception, prediction, planning, behavior. Default/range: 4 categories. Effect: Comprehensive coverage tests all driving reasoning aspects.
- scene_complexity — Role: Complexity of driving scenarios. How to set: Include simple and complex traffic scenarios. Default/range: Diverse. Effect: Complex scenarios test deeper reasoning.
Validation checks
- Perception questions should test correct object identification.
- Prediction questions should have verifiable future states.
- Planning questions should test safe driving decisions.
Failure modes
- Graph annotations may miss important scene elements.
- Template-based QA may lack diversity.
- Driving reasoning may be too specialized for general VLMs.
Adaptation notes for VLM training
- DriveLM-style data is essential for autonomous driving VLMs.
- The graph-to-QA approach generalizes to other structured domains.
- Combine with general instruction data for balanced training.
Implementation notes
- Use nuScenes annotations as the basis for graphs.
- Generate diverse question phrasings for robustness.
- Track per-category QA accuracy.
Evidence from the paper
- DriveLM creates structured driving QA data using graph-based scene understanding.
- Questions cover perception, prediction, planning, and behavior reasoning.
- The graph structure enables systematic and comprehensive QA generation.
- DriveLM enables end-to-end driving reasoning evaluation for VLMs.
Source paper
- Title: DriveLM: Driving with Graph Visual Question Answering
- Year: 2023
- Venue: ECCV
- Paper ID: arxiv-2312.14150v2
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2312.14150v2
- arXiv ID: 2312.14150v2
1---2name: drivelm-driving-with-graph-visual-question-answering-arxiv-23description: DriveLM: Driving with Graph Visual Question Answering4---5# DriveLM: Driving with Graph Visual Question Answering67## One-line decision8Use this skill when you want to create structured QA data for autonomous driving VLMs using graph-based scene understanding. Avoid it when you do not work with autonomous driving or need general-purpose VQA.910## Skill metadata11- **Skill type**: driving-qa-data-generation12- **Paper kind**: operational-method13- **Actionability**: high14- **Evidence quality**: full_paper1516## Goal17Create structured visual QA data for autonomous driving by building graph representations of driving scenes and generating questions about perception, prediction, planning, and behavior.1819## Problem signature20- Modality: driving scene images/videos with structured QA about driving tasks.21- Data state: driving scene data annotated with graph-based QA covering perception, prediction, and planning.22- Scale regime: thousands of driving scenes with comprehensive QA.23- Model requirement: VLM for driving scene understanding; graph annotation pipeline.2425## Use when26- You need driving-specific visual QA data.27- You want structured reasoning about driving scenes.28- You need perception, prediction, and planning QA.2930## Do not use when31- You do not work with autonomous driving.32- General VQA is sufficient for your needs.33- You lack driving scene data.3435## Required inputs36- **driving_scenes**: Driving scene images/videos from nuScenes or similar.37- **graph_annotations**: Graph representations of scene objects and relationships.38- **qa_templates**: Templates for perception, prediction, planning, and behavior questions.3940## Optional inputs41- **3d_annotations**: 3D bounding box and trajectory annotations.4243## Outputs44- **drivelm_qa_data**: Structured driving QA dataset.45- **driving_vlm**: VLM fine-tuned for driving scene understanding.4647## Assumptions and prerequisites48- Graph-based scene representation enables systematic QA generation.49- Driving tasks can be decomposed into perception, prediction, and planning.50- Structured QA teaches reasoning about driving scenarios.5152## Procedure531. **Build scene graphs**54 Action: Create graph representations of driving scenes with objects, relationships, and actions.55 Why: Graphs provide structured information for QA generation.56 Note: See paper for details.572. **Generate perception questions**58 Action: Create questions about what objects are present, their attributes, and locations.59 Why: Perception is the foundation of driving understanding.60 Note: See paper for details.613. **Generate prediction questions**62 Action: Create questions about what objects will do next.63 Why: Prediction is critical for safe driving.64 Note: See paper for details.654. **Generate planning questions**66 Action: Create questions about appropriate driving actions.67 Why: Planning tests end-to-end driving reasoning.68 Note: See paper for details.695. **Train driving VLM**70 Action: Fine-tune a VLM on the generated driving QA data.71 Why: Specialized training enables driving scene understanding.72 Note: See paper for details.7374## Parameters to set75- **qa_categories** — Role: Categories of driving questions. How to set: Include perception, prediction, planning, behavior. Default/range: 4 categories. Effect: Comprehensive coverage tests all driving reasoning aspects.76- **scene_complexity** — Role: Complexity of driving scenarios. How to set: Include simple and complex traffic scenarios. Default/range: Diverse. Effect: Complex scenarios test deeper reasoning.7778## Validation checks79- Perception questions should test correct object identification.80- Prediction questions should have verifiable future states.81- Planning questions should test safe driving decisions.8283## Failure modes84- Graph annotations may miss important scene elements.85- Template-based QA may lack diversity.86- Driving reasoning may be too specialized for general VLMs.8788## Adaptation notes for VLM training89- DriveLM-style data is essential for autonomous driving VLMs.90- The graph-to-QA approach generalizes to other structured domains.91- Combine with general instruction data for balanced training.9293## Implementation notes94- Use nuScenes annotations as the basis for graphs.95- Generate diverse question phrasings for robustness.96- Track per-category QA accuracy.9798## Evidence from the paper99- DriveLM creates structured driving QA data using graph-based scene understanding.100- Questions cover perception, prediction, planning, and behavior reasoning.101- The graph structure enables systematic and comprehensive QA generation.102- DriveLM enables end-to-end driving reasoning evaluation for VLMs.103104## Source paper105- **Title**: DriveLM: Driving with Graph Visual Question Answering106- **Year**: 2023107- **Venue**: ECCV108- **Paper ID**: arxiv-2312.14150v2109- **URL**: http://arxiv.org/abs/2312.14150v2110- **arXiv ID**: 2312.14150v2