Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Ruiming Liang

dblp:294/2679 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
3ranked-venue papers
1as first author
3since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · unresolved

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 2 · 2 since 2021Human-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 1 · 1 first-author · 1 since 2021

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Artificial intelligence
2 papers
Generative modeling · 56% Motion planning and robot control · 44%

Topics — the 6 heaviest of 7, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Robotics › Motion planning and robot control › motion planning
closed-loop planning
0.912025
Diffusion-Based Planning for Autonomous Driving with Flexible Guidance · ICLR 2025
Machine learning › Generative modeling › diffusion model
diffusion planning
0.912025
Diffusion-Based Planning for Autonomous Driving with Flexible Guidance · ICLR 2025
Machine learning › Generative modeling
flow matching
0.912025
Flow Matching-Based Autonomous Driving Planning with Advanced Interactive Behavior Modeling · NeurIPS 2025
Robotics › Motion planning and robot control
trajectory planning
0.912025
Flow Matching-Based Autonomous Driving Planning with Advanced Interactive Behavior Modeling · NeurIPS 2025
Machine learning › Generative modeling › diffusion model › guided diffusion
classifier guidance
0.312025
Diffusion-Based Planning for Autonomous Driving with Flexible Guidance · ICLR 2025
Machine learning › Generative modeling
diffusion model
0.312025
Diffusion-Based Planning for Autonomous Driving with Flexible Guidance · ICLR 2025

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

transformer · 1.7flow matching · 0.9diffusion model · 0.9classifier-free guidance · 0.9classifier guidance · 0.9
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 Diffusion-Based Planning for Autonomous Driving with Flexible Guidance
abstract
Achieving human-like driving behaviors in complex open-world environments is a critical challenge in autonomous driving. Contemporary learning-based planning approaches such as imitation learning methods often struggle to balance competing objectives and lack of safety assurance,due to limited adaptability and inadequacy in learning complex multi-modal behaviors commonly exhibited in human planning, not to mention their strong reliance on the fallback strategy with predefined rules. We propose a novel transformer-based Diffusion Planner for closed-loop planning, which can effectively model multi-modal driving behavior and ensure trajectory quality without any rule-based refinement. Our model supports joint modeling of both prediction and planning tasks under the same architecture, enabling cooperative behaviors between vehicles. Moreover, by learning the gradient of the trajectory score function and employing a flexible classifier guidance mechanism, Diffusion Planner effectively achieves safe and adaptable planning behaviors. Evaluations on the large-scale real-world autonomous planning benchmark nuPlan and our newly collected 200-hour delivery-vehicle driving dataset demonstrate that Diffusion Planner achieves state-of-the-art closed-loop performance with robust transferability in diverse driving styles.
Yinan Zheng, Ruiming Liang, Kexin Zheng, Jinliang Zheng, Liyuan Mao, Weihao Gu, Rui Ai 0001, Shengbo Eben Li, Xianyuan Zhan
ICLR2
2025 Flow Matching-Based Autonomous Driving Planning with Advanced Interactive Behavior Modeling
abstract
Modeling interactive driving behaviors in complex scenarios remains a fundamental challenge for autonomous driving planning. Learning-based approaches attempt to address this challenge with advanced generative models, removing the dependency on over-engineered architectures for representation fusion. However, brute-force implementation by simply stacking transformer blocks lacks a dedicated mechanism for modeling interactive behaviors that is common in real driving scenarios. The scarcity of interactive driving data further exacerbates this problem, leaving conventional imitation learning methods ill-equipped to capture high-value interactive behaviors. We propose Flow Planner, which tackles these problems through coordinated innovations in data modeling, model architecture, and learning scheme. Specifically, we first introduce fine-grained trajectory tokenization, which decomposes the trajectory into overlapping segments to decrease the complexity of whole trajectory modeling. With a sophisticatedly designed architecture, we achieve efficient temporal and spatial fusion of planning and scene information, to better capture interactive behaviors. In addition, the framework incorporates flow matching with classifier-free guidance for multi-modal behavior generation, which dynamically reweights agent interactions during inference to maintain coherent response strategies, providing a critical boost for interactive scenario understanding. Experimental results on the large-scale nuPlan dataset demonstrate that Flow Planner achieves state-of-the-art performance among learning-based approaches while effectively modeling interactive behaviors in complex driving scenarios.
Tianyi Tan, Yinan Zheng, Ruiming Liang, Zexu Wang, Kexin Zheng, Jinliang Zheng, Xianyuan Zhan
NeurIPS3
2021 Path Analysis of Online Learning Behavior Based on Whole Brain Mode
abstract
Based on the whole-brain model, the paper uses GSEQ software to analyze the specific sequences of learner behaviors with the lag sequence analysis method. Then, analyzes and explains its transformation paths and differences. There are four types of learners, such as logical learners, organizational learners, communicative learners, and utopian learners. Among them, the sequence of the first two is a network structure, and the latter two is a linear structure. Finally, this paper puts forward some relevant suggestions on the design, path and resource recommendation of online learning platform, to promote the further development of personalized learning.
Ruiming Liang, Qiang Jiang, Baoxia Jian
CSCWD1