SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2512.24504

Thinking on Maps: How Foundation Model Agents Explore, Remember, and Reason Map Environments

Abstract

Map environments provide a fundamental medium for representing spatial structure. Understanding how foundation model (FM) agents understand and act in such environments is therefore critical for enabling reliable map-based reasoning and applications. However, most existing evaluations of spatial ability in FMs rely on static map inputs or text-based queries, overlooking the interactive and experience-driven nature of spatial understanding.In this paper, we propose an interactive evaluation framework to analyze how FM agents explore, remember, and reason in symbolic map environments. Agents incrementally explore partially observable grid-based maps consisting of roads, intersections, and points of interest (POIs), receiving only local observations at each step. Spatial understanding is then evaluated using six kinds of spatial tasks. By systematically varying exploration strategies, memory representations, and reasoning schemes across multiple foundation models, we reveal distinct functional roles of these components. Exploration primarily affects experience acquisition but has a limited impact on final reasoning accuracy. In contrast, memory representation plays a central role in consolidating spatial experience, with structured memories particularly sequential and graph-based representations, substantially improving performance on structure-intensive tasks such as path planning. Reasoning schemes further shape how stored spatial knowledge is used, with advanced prompts supporting more effective multi-step inference. We further observe that spatial reasoning performance saturates across model versions and scales beyond a certain capability threshold, indicating that improvements in map-based spatial understanding require mechanisms tailored to spatial representation and reasoning rather than scaling alone.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Zhiwei Wei, Yuxing Liu, Hua Liao, Wenjia Xu. 2025-12-30. Thinking on Maps: How Foundation Model Agents Explore, Remember, and Reason Map Environments. https://arxiv.org/abs/2512.24504

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Decoupling Readiness from Release for Tail-Aware Scheduling of Agentic LLM Workflows

Agentic LLM workflows consist of sequences of model turns interleaved with tool interactions, so their end-to-end completion time depends not only on inference speed but also on when ready turns are released. Most runtimes release each turn immediately upon readiness. Under contention, this eager release policy can accumulate released but unfinished work; once submitted, those turns can no longer be reordered by the workflow-level policy, increasing tail latency. We present a tail-risk-aware turn release scheduling method that jointly decides which ready turn to release next and how much released but unfinished work to maintain. The method uses a mean--Conditional Value-at-Risk (CVaR) objective to capture the evolving tail risk of unfinished workflows, incorporates online estimates of turn work when prioritizing ready turns, and adapts the released work budget to observed queue pressure. We evaluate the method using real agent execution traces from software engineering tasks across multiple LLMs and workflow arrival rates. The method performs comparably to eager release under light load and substantially reduces the P95 of workflow flow time under contention, achieving up to a \(3.50\times\) speedup.

cs.AI

Demystifying the Privacy-Utility Trade-off in LLM Interactions

The integration of Large Language Models into daily tasks relies on context-rich instructions, inevitably exposing sensitive user information. Current privacy-preserving methods typically employ context-agnostic static rules, causing severe utility degradation. However, the specific mechanisms governing how sanitization impacts downstream performance remain largely underexplored. To address this, we conduct a systematic analysis to deconstruct the privacy-utility trade-off, uncovering three underlying mechanisms: (1) Context-Dependent Utility, which first establishes when to sanitize by revealing that data value shifts from critical constraints to dispensable noise based on user intent; (2) Strategic Adaptation, which subsequently determines how to sanitize by dictating that the choice between removal and replacement depends on the task's reliance on factual integrity versus structural coherence; and (3) Combinatorial Interplay, which finally extends the protection scope by demonstrating that attributes form a semantic web of synergistic dependencies or antagonistic redundancies. Guided by these insights, we introduce an intent-driven local protection framework. By distilling a lightweight model Veilmind-4B to drive a dynamic extraction-sanitization-restoration pipeline, our approach reaches a low-leakage privacy point while preserving substantially higher response utility than existing privacy-oriented baselines, advancing the privacy-utility trade-off toward the Pareto frontier.

cs.AI

Defining AI Agents: A Compendium of Criteria, Metrics, and Benchmarks

The term agent in artificial intelligence lacks a standard definition, complicating the evaluation, comparison, and reproducibility of AI agent research. We address this ambiguity through a survey organized around five dimensions of agenticness: environmental interaction, learning and adaptation, autonomy, goal-directed behavior, and temporal coherence. For each dimension, we examine how the underlying capability has been conceptualized across prior work and synthesize the metrics, benchmarks, and evaluation frameworks used to assess it. This review provides a structured account of the current landscape of agent evaluation, highlighting both established approaches and areas where evaluation remains limited or inconsistent. We additionally introduce the Agent Compendium, a public-facing digital resource that organizes and extends the evaluation methods identified through this review. Together, the survey and compendium provide a common structure for evaluating and comparing agent capabilities across AI systems, supporting more reproducible research, clearer communication, and more systematic study of artificial agents.

cs.AI