AirScape: An Aerial Generative World Model with Motion Controllability

Baining Zhao; Rongze Tang; Mingyuan Jia; Ziyou Wang; Fanghang Man; Xin Zhang; Yu Shang; Weichen Zhang; Wei Wu; Chen Gao; Xinlei Chen; Yong Li

arXiv · 2507.08885

AirScape: An Aerial Generative World Model with Motion Controllability

Baining Zhao·Rongze Tang·Mingyuan Jia·Ziyou Wang·Fanghang Man·Xin Zhang·Yu Shang·Weichen Zhang·Wei Wu·Chen Gao·Xinlei Chen·Yong Li

View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

How to enable agents to predict the outcomes of their own motion intentions in three-dimensional space has been a fundamental problem in embodied intelligence. To explore general spatial imagination capability, we present AirScape, the first world model designed for six-degree-of-freedom aerial agents. AirScape predicts future observation sequences based on current visual inputs and motion intentions. Specifically, we construct a dataset for aerial world model training and testing, which consists of 11k video-intention pairs. This dataset includes first-person-view videos capturing diverse drone actions across a wide range of scenarios, with over 1,000 hours spent annotating the corresponding motion intentions. Then we develop a two-phase schedule to train a foundation model--initially devoid of embodied spatial knowledge--into a world model that is controllable by motion intentions and adheres to physical spatio-temporal constraints. Experimental results demonstrate that AirScape significantly outperforms existing foundation models in 3D spatial imagination capabilities, especially with over a 50% improvement in metrics reflecting motion alignment. The project is available at: https://embodiedcity.github.io/AirScape/.

Explore related subjects

cs.RO cs.AI

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

Baining Zhao, Rongze Tang, Mingyuan Jia, Ziyou Wang, Fanghang Man, Xin Zhang, Yu Shang, Weichen Zhang, Wei Wu, Chen Gao, Xinlei Chen, Yong Li. 2025-07-10. AirScape: An Aerial Generative World Model with Motion Controllability. https://arxiv.org/abs/2507.08885

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

IMLE-VLA: Fast Single-Step Action Generation for Vision-Language-Action Policies

Vision-language-action (VLA) policies leverage pretrained vision-language backbones to achieve strong cross-task generalization. A leading design couples this backbone with a dedicated continuous action head trained via diffusion or flow matching. However, such heads rely on iterative multi-step sampling, for example 10 Euler steps in $\pi_{0.5}$. This creates an inference bottleneck that produces stop-and-go movement in the robot and slower task completion. We introduce IMLE-VLA, which replaces the iterative action head with a single-step conditional generator trained via conditional Implicit Maximum Likelihood Estimation (cIMLE). The cIMLE objective promotes multimodal action coverage, avoiding the mode collapse of naive regression heads while eliminating multi-step sampling entirely. When IMLE-VLA is applied to $\pi_{0.5}$, it increases inference frequency 3.67x (55 Hz vs. 15 Hz), enabling up to 11x higher action throughput. On the 40-task LIBERO benchmark, IMLE-VLA achieves the highest average success rate (98.0%) among all baselines while leading in inference frequency. Under the test-time perturbations of LIBERO-plus, IMLE-VLA retains $\pi_{0.5}$'s robustness while other baselines degrade sharply, confirming that the cIMLE head preserves generalization. Real-world experiments on a Franka Emika Panda across four tasks demonstrate smoother motion (2.2x to 3.0x lower jerk) and faster task completion, with IMLE-VLA outperforming $\pi_{0.5}$ on every task and reducing average VLA inference time per episode by 3.9x to 6.6x. Videos and code are available at https://kianhk6.github.io/IMLE-VLA/

cs.RO↗

arXiv2026

ObstaDiff: Generalizable Diffusion Policy Learning via Obstacle-aware Representations

Imitation learning has achieved impressive results in robotic manipulation, yet most existing approaches assume clean backgrounds and lack explicit mechanisms for obstacle-aware motion generation. Extending such policies to cluttered, real-world scenes with unstructured obstacles remains a key generalization challenge. We present ObstaDiff, a decomposed diffusion-policy framework with a lightweight obstacle-aware visual encoder. ObstaDiff extracts a structured target-obstacle-background representation, enabling the downstream alignment policy to generate end-effector trajectories toward a target-centered bottleneck pose while reasoning about surrounding obstacles. We evaluate ObstaDiff on 61 real-robot greenhouse trials per method (366 executions in total). ObstaDiff achieves 75.41% average task success and 8.20% average obstacle collision rate, outperforming representative imitation-learning baselines and improving generalization in cluttered agricultural scenes.

cs.RO↗

arXiv2026

Testing Between the Test Cases: Proving End-to-End Steering in Conditions You Never Drove

AI-based automated vehicle testing is challenging because a model that passes every test condition can still fail in the real world. Formal verification offers a way to directly address this gap. On a simulated highway and an arterial road we trained two small end-to-end steering networks each in CARLA, one on clear conditions alone and one on clear, fog, night and low sun. All four models were driven against a 2.19 ft lane-departure budget. Without driving again, we used bound propagation, a formal method that reads the trained weights, to compute how far steering can drift at every disturbance strength between two captured images. One calculation covers more than a campaign could drive: on the arterial it spans 133 poses, where ten intensities each would be 10^133 combinations, in minutes on one GPU. Not only did formal verification find conditions that broke the clear-trained policy without simulation testing, it provided some preliminary evidence for potential failures between the test cases. Our overall conclusion is that formal verification is a viable complement to simulation, and could be adopted as a part of verification and validation for automated driving.

cs.RO↗