ExecutionBridge

Plans Are Not
Executions.

Adapting Frozen World-Model Planners to Controller-Induced Execution Shift

A frozen world model can imagine the wrong future when a new controller executes the same plan differently. ExecutionBridge keeps the plan intact and adapts the imagined future before candidates are scored.

Code · Coming soonExplore the idea

Research prototype · evaluated on NAVSIM

+0.613

Full-set NAVSIM PDMS

87.976 → 88.589 across 10 held-out controllers

+14.090

Low-score PDMS

32.038 → 46.128 on difficult scenes

+0.048

Direct substitution

better execution, almost no decision gain

01 / Why it matters

The same plan can produce a different future.

World-model planners evaluate each candidate by imagining what happens after it is executed. A deployment controller with different gains, lag, or actuation can turn that same plan into different motion, leaving the frozen model to evaluate a mismatched future.

The planning-execution gap, why direct substitution fails, and the ExecutionBridge principle
Keep the plan. Adapt the imagined future.
01Same planplanner output
02Different executioncontroller response
03Wrong imagined futurecandidate ranking shifts

02 / Controller shift

One plan.
Many ways to execute it.

The evaluation holds out ten controller configurations. The static atlas shows the parameter changes; the animation makes the shift visible by comparing each planned trajectory with its executed trajectory.

Ten controller parameter configurations comparing planned and executed trajectories
Static controller atlas Dashed: planned; solid: executed. Ten controller configurations.
Animated controller parameter sweep showing planned and executed trajectories
Animated parameter sweep One controller profile per frame, 0.6 seconds each.
Open the static controller parameter atlas

03 / Method

Keep the plan. Adapt the imagined future.

ExecutionBridge learns controller-specific execution characteristics from support pairs. It leaves the planner, world model, reward head, and candidate trajectories untouched, then adapts only the ego-related latent before scoring.

ExecutionBridge controller encoder and controller-conditioned latent bridge architecture
The original plan remains the world-model condition; controller evidence changes the imagined rollout, not the plan itself.
  1. 01

    Observe

    Collect planned-executed trajectory pairs from the deployment controller.

  2. 02

    Encode

    Summarize those pairs into one compact controller representation.

  3. 03

    Adapt

    Apply a gated, trust-region correction to the ego latent rollout.

  4. 04

    Score

    Use the unchanged reward model to rank the original candidates.

Support-set identification

Controller Encoder

A temporal encoder pools planned-executed pairs into a compact representation of persistent controller behavior. At deployment, this representation is computed once and cached.

Trust-region adaptation

Latent Bridge

A gated, bounded correction adapts the native ego rollout while preserving the planned trajectory and frozen reward model. No online optimization is required.

Frozen throughoutPlanner · World model · Reward head · Candidate generator

04 / Results

Small intervention.
Consistent decisions.

ExecutionBridge improves planning across ten held-out controller configurations under a controller-disjoint protocol. The direct-substitution diagnostic raises full-set PDMS only from 87.976 to 88.024 (+0.048), while ExecutionBridge keeps the original plan and adapts the imagined future for +0.613 overall and +14.090 on the fixed low-score subset.

All evaluation scenes

87.976 88.589full-set PDMS Improved on all 10 unseen styles

Diagnostic · direct substitution

+0.048full-set PDMS · 88.024 vs 87.976Execution geometry improves; candidate ranking barely moves.
Ablation comparing execution fidelity, ranking fidelity, selection quality, and decision quality
Execution fidelity is not decision fidelity. Exact execution sharply reduces geometric error, but ranking changes only marginally; latent adaptation gives the strongest decision quality.

Ablation · Table III

Where the gain comes from.

Low-score PDMS
VariantFullLow-score
Frozen WoTE87.97632.038
Decision-only88.07135.214
Score calibration88.18440.327
Residual-conditioned88.31245.550
ExecutionBridge88.58946.128

Takeaway. Conditioning the latent bridge on the controller representation outperforms score-only and candidate-residual variants.Support-set sensitivity: full PDMS stays near 88.44 and low-score PDMS near 45.95 from N = 64 to 1024.

Cross-backbone transfer

One bridge principle, three frozen planners.

Standard NAVSIM
Frozen plannerNative PDMSWith ExecutionBridgeGain
WoTE88.288.8+0.6
ResWorld88.388.7+0.4
WorldDrive89.089.3+0.3

05 / Qualitative results

When execution shift changes the safe choice.

Across representative NAVSIM scenes, the bridge changes which candidate is selected in cases involving rear-end collisions, under-steering, curb violations, and oncoming-lane failures.

06 / Reproduce

Reproduce after
the review.

The evaluation protocol, held-out controller setup, and resource layout will be released with the anonymized code package.

  • Controller-disjoint evaluation covers ten held-out controller configurations.
  • Paper metrics include full-set and low-score PDMS, plus decision-level diagnostics.
  • Release package will document code and machine-specific paths after review.

quick-start.sh

# Reproduction package will be released after review.
# The paper documents the held-out controller protocol.
# Machine-specific datasets and checkpoints stay outside Git.

Resources

Paper and the reproducible release.

Paper

Plans Are Not Executions: Adapting Frozen World-Model Planners to Controller-Induced Execution Shift. Citation metadata will be added with the public paper release.