Papers
arxiv:2609.01404

Evaluating Multimodal LLMs as Generalist Vision-Language-Action Agents for Drone Control: Commanding, Approaching, Tracking and Searching

Published on Sep 1
· Submitted by
Geewook Kim
on Sep 2
Authors:
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,

Abstract

DroneCATS evaluates multimodal language models as drone controllers and finds that small open models navigate well but fail at protocol adherence and termination, highlighting a gap between spatial perception and disciplined action.

Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) are strong perceivers of images and video. We ask how far that reach extends into acting: dropping an MLLM directly into a drone's control loop, with its entire action space declared solely in the prompt. Recent systems approach this setting but increasingly narrow the model's decision-making. We widen it back. We introduce DroneCATS-Agent, an architecture where the MLLM is a swappable component, and DroneCATS, a benchmark treating the model as the independent variable. Beyond merely flying toward a pixel, our agent entrusts the model to yaw and search, deliberate when unsure, and self-declare arrival---all without fine-tuning or function-calling schemas. Evaluating frontier and open models across four core capabilities---approaching a visible target, tracking a moving one, searching outside the initial view, and commanding a multi-drone fleet---reveals that even the simplest embodied settings are far from solved. Crucially, to identify what breaks first at the edge, our roster scales down to 2B parameters. The findings expose a stark paradox: it is not the flying that fails. Small open models often navigate into the success radius more reliably than frontier models, yet lose the episode by declaring arrival prematurely or not at all. Multi-drone commanding amplifies this divide, with small models failing by blindly copying a single coordinate across distinct views. Viewed as vision-language-action agents, the models' spatial perception holds up, but their action protocol does not. What separates a deployable edge model from a frontier model is not navigation, but the discipline to sustain a declared protocol and emit the correct terminating action. The open problem is closing this gap at onboard compute costs---yielding a fast model that plans persistently and knows exactly when it is done---and DroneCATS is built to measure that distance.

Community

Paper author Paper submitter

Can an off-the-shelf multimodal LLM work as a VLA agent for drones?

IMG_6642

We drop MLLMs directly into a drone’s control loop with the entire action space declared in the prompt: point and go, rotate to search, think, and declare arrival. No fine-tuning, no function-calling schema, so any MLLM plugs in unchanged. DroneCATS benchmarks nine models in closed-loop simulation (GPT-5, Claude Opus 5, Gemini 3.7 Flash, Gemini Robotics-ER 2, the Qwen3.5 family at four sizes, and Cosmos3-Edge-2B) on approaching, tracking, searching, and commanding a four-drone fleet.

The main finding: small models fly fine, sometimes reaching the target more reliably than frontier models. What breaks is the action protocol. Qwen3.5-9B enters the success radius in 90% of approaching episodes but converts only 35%, declaring arrival too early or never. In fleet commanding, small models paste one coordinate into four different views. An agent that cannot recognize its own completion cannot be delegated to, and closing that gap at onboard compute cost is the open problem DroneCATS measures.

Code will be released at https://github.com/naver-ai/DroneCATS

This is an automated message from the Librarian Bot. I found the following papers similar to this paper.

The following papers were recommended by the Semantic Scholar API

Please give a thumbs up to this comment if you found it helpful!

If you want recommendations for any Paper on Hugging Face checkout this Space

You can directly ask Librarian Bot for paper recommendations by tagging it in a comment: @librarian-bot recommend

Sign up or log in to comment

Get this paper in your agent:

hf papers read 2609.01404
Don't have the latest CLI?
curl -LsSf https://hf.co/cli/install.sh | bash

Models citing this paper 0

No model linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2609.01404 in a model README.md to link it from this page.

Datasets citing this paper 0

No dataset linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2609.01404 in a dataset README.md to link it from this page.

Spaces citing this paper 0

No Space linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2609.01404 in a Space README.md to link it from this page.

Collections including this paper 0

No Collection including this paper

Add this paper to a collection to link it from this page.