Paper detail

Thinking on Maps: How Foundation Model Agents Explore, Remember, and Reason Map Environments

Map environments provide a fundamental medium for representing spatial structure. Understanding how foundation model (FM) agents understand and act in such environments is therefore critical for enabling reliable map-based reasoning and applications. However, most existing evaluations of spatial ability in FMs rely on static map inputs or text-based queries, overlooking the interactive and experience-driven nature of spatial understanding.In this paper, we propose an interactive evaluation framework to analyze how FM agents explore, remember, and reason in symbolic map environments. Agents incrementally explore partially observable grid-based maps consisting of roads, intersections, and points of interest (POIs), receiving only local observations at each step. Spatial understanding is then evaluated using six kinds of spatial tasks. By systematically varying exploration strategies, memory representations, and reasoning schemes across multiple foundation models, we reveal distinct functional roles of these components. Exploration primarily affects experience acquisition but has a limited impact on final reasoning accuracy. In contrast, memory representation plays a central role in consolidating spatial experience, with structured memories particularly sequential and graph-based representations, substantially improving performance on structure-intensive tasks such as path planning. Reasoning schemes further shape how stored spatial knowledge is used, with advanced prompts supporting more effective multi-step inference. We further observe that spatial reasoning performance saturates across model versions and scales beyond a certain capability threshold, indicating that improvements in map-based spatial understanding require mechanisms tailored to spatial representation and reasoning rather than scaling alone.

preprint2026arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.