Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2608.16349

AeroCopilotBench: A Two-Tier Benchmark for Evaluating LLM Agents as Aviation Copilots in an Interactive Virtual Cockpit Environment

Yuchen Yuan·Zhenghuang Wu·Yuangan Li·Liang Ma·Ke Li
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Large language model (LLM) agents may assist flight crews with complex decisions and task execution, but existing aviation evaluations centered on static knowledge do not support systematic testing of procedural execution and safety compliance in interactive environments. This paper presents the AeroCopilot Operational Environment (ACOE), a reproducible interactive virtual-cockpit test environment, and AeroCopilotBench, a two-tier aviation agent evaluation benchmark. Tier-1 evaluates aviation knowledge using 1,200 multiple-choice questions, while Tier-2 comprises 73 emergency and abnormal tasks derived from the manufacturers' Pilot's Operating Handbooks (POHs) and instantiated in ACOE. ACOE converts natural-language procedures into executable state transitions, final-state goal conditions, and hard safety constraints, enabling models to interpret cockpit state, diagnose faults, and operate aircraft systems through standardized tool interfaces. We establish a safety-gated evaluation framework in which a trajectory succeeds only when all task goals are achieved without violating any hard safety constraint, while safe goal progress and trajectory safety are measured separately. Across 12 models, the highest Tier-2 success rate is 72.6%, while static knowledge performance does not consistently translate into procedural execution. Analysis of 451 failed episodes from 3 representative models identifies recurring failures in procedural completeness, use of state feedback, and long-horizon execution management. These findings motivate state-aware agent orchestration, joint assessment of task completion and trajectory safety, and repeated regression testing. ACOE and AeroCopilotBench provide a reproducible foundation for testing knowledge application, interactive execution, and operational safety in aviation agents.

Explore related subjects

cs.AI

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Yuchen Yuan, Zhenghuang Wu, Yuangan Li, Liang Ma, Ke Li. 2026-08-17. AeroCopilotBench: A Two-Tier Benchmark for Evaluating LLM Agents as Aviation Copilots in an Interactive Virtual Cockpit Environment. https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.16349

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

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↗
arXiv2026

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↗
arXiv2026

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↗