Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 cited by

MMRo: Are Multimodal LLMs Eligible as the Brain for In-Home Robotics?

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2406.19693 v1 pith:SPS3NG2K submitted 2024-06-28 cs.RO cs.CV

classification cs.ROcs.CV
keywords mllmsbrainmodelsmultimodalplanningreasoningrobotsbenchmark
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

It is fundamentally challenging for robots to serve as useful assistants in human environments because this requires addressing a spectrum of sub-problems across robotics, including perception, language understanding, reasoning, and planning. The recent advancements in Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) have demonstrated their exceptional abilities in solving complex mathematical problems, mastering commonsense and abstract reasoning. This has led to the recent utilization of MLLMs as the brain in robotic systems, enabling these models to conduct high-level planning prior to triggering low-level control actions for task execution. However, it remains uncertain whether existing MLLMs are reliable in serving the brain role of robots. In this study, we introduce the first benchmark for evaluating Multimodal LLM for Robotic (MMRo) benchmark, which tests the capability of MLLMs for robot applications. Specifically, we identify four essential capabilities perception, task planning, visual reasoning, and safety measurement that MLLMs must possess to qualify as the robot's central processing unit. We have developed several scenarios for each capability, resulting in a total of 14 metrics for evaluation. We present experimental results for various MLLMs, including both commercial and open-source models, to assess the performance of existing systems. Our findings indicate that no single model excels in all areas, suggesting that current MLLMs are not yet trustworthy enough to serve as the cognitive core for robots. Our data can be found in https://mm-robobench.github.io/.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Measuring Cross-Modal Synergy: A Benchmark for VLM Explainability

    cs.AI 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0 of 10

    Introduces Synergistic Faithfulness metric based on Shapley Interaction Index to evaluate cross-modal synergy in VLM explainers, revealing over-reliance on visual salience in existing methods.

  2. Safety in Embodied AI: A Survey of Risks, Attacks, and Defenses

    cs.CR 2026-03 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    The survey organizes over 400 papers on embodied AI safety into a multi-level taxonomy and flags overlooked issues such as fragile multimodal fusion and unstable planning under jailbreaks.

  3. Safety in Embodied AI: A Survey of Risks, Attacks, and Defenses

    cs.CR 2026-03 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

    A multi-level taxonomy of risks, attacks, and defenses across the full embodied AI pipeline, synthesizing 500+ papers and flagging overlooked failure modes.

  4. Unified Embodied VLM Reasoning with Robotic Action via Autoregressive Discretized Pre-training

    cs.RO 2025-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A 6K-question embodied-reasoning benchmark plus a flow-matching action tokenizer let one 3B vision-language model reason and manipulate better than continuous- or discrete-action VLA baselines.

Pith tools