IndustryNav: Exploring Spatial Reasoning of Embodied Agents in Dynamic Industrial Navigation
Reviewed by Pith T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 kernel pith:ZUVSB27Krecord.jsonopen to challenge →
read the original abstract
While Visual Large Language Models (VLLMs) show great promise as embodied agents, they continue to face substantial challenges in spatial reasoning. Existing embodied benchmarks largely focus on passive, static household environments and evaluate isolated capabilities, failing to capture holistic performance in interactive and dynamic complexity of specific domains. To fill this gap, we present IndustryNav, the first dynamic industrial navigation benchmark for active spatial reasoning. IndustryNav leverages 12 manually created, high-fidelity Unity warehouse scenarios featuring dynamic objects and human movement. We proposes a zero-shot PointGoal navigation pipeline that effectively combines egocentric vision with global odometry to assess holistic local-global planning. Furthermore, we introduce the "collision rate" and "warning rate" metrics to measure safety-oriented behaviors. A comprehensive study of fourteen state-of-the-art VLLMs (including models such as GPT-5.2, Claude-4.6, and Gemini-3) reveals that closed-source models maintain a consistent advantage; however, all agents exhibit notable deficiencies in robust path planning, collision avoidance and active exploration. This highlights a critical need for embodied research to move beyond passive perception and toward tasks that demand stable planning, active exploration, and safe behavior in vivid, dynamic environments.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
IndustryAssetEQA: A Neurosymbolic Operational Intelligence System for Embodied Question Answering in Industrial Asset Maintenance
IndustryAssetEQA integrates episodic telemetry representations with an FMEA knowledge graph to support embodied question answering over industrial assets, showing large gains in validity and reduced overclaims versus ...
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.