# Offline Multimodal Large Language Models for Decision Support in Air Operations

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.21390 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.21390/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in MLLM training and visual instruction tuning, one of 16 directions in Multimodal LLMs / vision-language models.
- Builds on 3 of its 33 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 18 Sep 2026.

## Placed in

- Multimodal LLMs / vision-language models / [MLLM training and visual instruction tuning](https://mlsanity.com/mllm/mllm-training-and-visual-instruction-tuning/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 3 of 3)

- [Qwen2.5 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.15115/) (2024)
- [MiniCPM-V: A GPT-4V Level MLLM on Your Phone](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.01800/) (2024)
- [Language Is Not All You Need: Aligning Perception with Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.14045/) (2023)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Air operations rely on complex rules, established procedures, and time-critical analysis under limited connectivity and strict security constraints. In such environments, analysts must combine written doctrine with images, often without access to external computing resources. This paper studies offline large language models as decision support tools, deployed in isolated and restricted environments to give analysts access to doctrinal knowledge that remains traceable to its original sources through natural language interaction. We describe a modular retrieval-augmented architecture suitable for operation without Internet connectivity, supporting both text and image input from technical manuals. As a first step toward evaluating this architecture, we report a pilot study with four image analysts of the Brazilian Air Force, combining (i) a doctrinal knowledge assessment based on their electronic-target identification doctrine, comparing human and proposed system performance on the same test, and (ii) a measurement of the cognitive workload involved in manually producing a reconnaissance target report (Relat'orio de Miss~ao de Reconhecimento - REMIR) without AI assistance. The results show a demanding manual task, especially in terms of mental demand (6.0/7) and effort (5.0/7), while the proposed system matches the human score (8/10) and completes the assessment in 7.1 minutes (compared to a human average of 26.5 minutes), establishing a baseline for future AI-assisted evaluation. Finally, we describe a future evaluation protocol to systematically compare manual and AI-assisted workflows.