mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Done, But Not Sure: Disentangling World Completion from Self-Termination in Embodied Agents

arXiv 2605.08747 ↗First posted 9 May 2026cs.AIcited by 7

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Standard embodied evaluations do not independently score whether an agent correctly commits to task completion at episode closure, a capacity we call terminal commitment. Behaviorally distinct failures--never completing the task, completing it but failing to stop, and reporting success without sufficient evidence--collapse into the same benchmark failure. We introduce VIGIL, an evaluation framework that makes terminal commitment independently measurable. Under VIGIL's default protocol, agents observe only egocentric RGB, receive no action-success signals, and must end each episode with a semantic report checked deterministically against hidden world state. This yields two separate scores: world-state completion (W) and benchmark success (B), where B additionally requires a correct terminal report. This decoupling makes four outcome categories distinguishable: missed execution, post-attainment drift, unsupported commitment, and verified success. Across 20 models on 1,000 frozen episodes, systems with comparable W differ by up to 19.7 pp in B: one model converts achieved states into correct reports, while another with near-identical execution drifts past the goal without closing. An action-feedback intervention further tests the separation: execution-oriented signals improve W broadly, yet commitment failures persist in models that do not already ground terminal reports in the achieved state. VIGIL provides a protocol that makes terminal commitment independently visible and scorable.

Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 37 of its 43 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 9 May 2026.

Builds on

37 of 43 references.

References · 37

  1. 2025Qwen3 Technical Reportcited by 8,195
  2. 2023RT-2: Vision-Language-Action Models Transfer Web Knowledge to Robotic Controlcited by 2,993
  3. 2025Qwen3-VL Technical Reportcited by 2,534
  4. 2022Language Models (Mostly) Know What They Knowcited by 1,783
  5. 2025InternVL3.5: Advancing Open-Source Multimodal Models in Versatility, Reasoning, and Efficiencycited by 1,419
  6. 2020ALFWorld: Aligning Text and Embodied Environments for Interactive Learningcited by 1,143
  7. 2022Inner Monologue: Embodied Reasoning through Planning with Language Modelscited by 1,057
  8. 2017AI2-THOR: An Interactive 3D Environment for Visual AIcited by 850
  9. 2019ALFRED: A Benchmark for Interpreting Grounded Instructions for Everyday Taskscited by 773
  10. 2024SpatialVLM: Endowing Vision-Language Models with Spatial Reasoning Capabilitiescited by 679
  11. 2024Thinking in Space: How Multimodal Large Language Models See, Remember, and Recall Spacescited by 580
  12. 2025Kimi-VL Technical Reportcited by 381
25 more
  1. 2022ProcTHOR: Large-Scale Embodied AI Using Procedural Generationcited by 369
  2. 2025Seed1.5-VL Technical Reportcited by 367
  3. 2023Robots That Ask For Help: Uncertainty Alignment for Large Language Model Plannerscited by 298
  4. 2024SpatialRGPT: Grounded Spatial Reasoning in Vision Language Modelscited by 297
  5. 2024RoboPoint: A Vision-Language Model for Spatial Affordance Prediction for Roboticscited by 242
  6. 2025EmbodiedBench: Comprehensive Benchmarking Multi-modal Large Language Models for Vision-Driven Embodied Agentscited by 213
  7. 2021TEACh: Task-driven Embodied Agents that Chatcited by 194
  8. 2025MMSI-Bench: A Benchmark for Multi-Image Spatial Intelligencecited by 169
  9. 2024Embodied Agent Interface: Benchmarking LLMs for Embodied Decision Makingcited by 142
  10. 2025RoboBrain: A Unified Brain Model for Robotic Manipulation from Abstract to Concretecited by 134
  11. 2024RoboSpatial: Teaching Spatial Understanding to 2D and 3D Vision-Language Models for Roboticscited by 133
  12. 2025Cambrian-S: Towards Spatial Supersensing in Videocited by 123
  13. 2025OmniSpatial: Towards Comprehensive Spatial Reasoning Benchmark for Vision Language Modelscited by 105
  14. 2024GOAT-Bench: A Benchmark for Multi-Modal Lifelong Navigationcited by 93
  15. 2022VLMbench: A Compositional Benchmark for Vision-and-Language Manipulationcited by 68
  16. 2025EmbodiedEval: Evaluate Multimodal LLMs as Embodied Agentscited by 55
  17. 2024LoTa-Bench: Benchmarking Language-oriented Task Planners for Embodied Agentscited by 51
  18. 2025VLM4D: Towards Spatiotemporal Awareness in Vision Language Modelscited by 43
  19. 2025MiMo-Embodied: X-Embodied Foundation Model Technical Reportcited by 36
  20. 2025Spatial457: A Diagnostic Benchmark for 6D Spatial Reasoning of Large Multimodal Modelscited by 34
  21. 2026RynnBrain: Open Embodied Foundation Modelscited by 33
  22. 2026Theory of Space: Can Foundation Models Construct Spatial Beliefs through Active Exploration?cited by 18
  23. 2024ReALFRED: An Embodied Instruction Following Benchmark in Photo-Realistic Environmentscited by 16
  24. 2025CubeBench: Diagnosing Interactive, Long-Horizon Spatial Reasoning Under Partial Observationscited by 3
  25. 2026How Foundational Skills Influence VLM-based Embodied Agents:A Native Perspectivecited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 7.

7 papers.