Paper · arXiv 2609.01404
Evaluating Multimodal LLMs as Generalist Vision-Language-Action Agents for Drone Control: Commanding, Approaching, Tracking and Searching
Jaewoo Park, Minyoung Lee, Sukmin Seo, Moonbin Yim, Hyunwook Yoon, Dohoon Ryu, Daehee Kim, Myungseo Song, Jihyuk Byun, Seunggyu Chang, Taeho Kil, Jiseob Kim, Bado Lee, Geewook Kim
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.
Abstract
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.