GISAgentBench is introduced, a benchmark of 349 multi-step GIS tasks curated from GIS Stack Exchange and instantiated on real public data across six selected geographic areas of interest, enabling strict, deterministic, tolerance-aware output matching beyond LLM judging.
Abstract
Geographic Information System (GIS) professionals rely on multi-step spatial analysis workflows to support decision-making in urban planning, disaster response, and environmental monitoring. The process is tedious, time-consuming, and error-prone. While recent large language model (LLM) agents equipped with external tools have the potential to automate geospatial analysis, their ability to perform realistic GIS workflows remains largely unexplored. Existing GIS agent benchmarking datasets are mostly drawn from textbooks, tutorials, or LLM-generated seeds and remain limited in size and trajectory depth. More importantly, none provides ground truth outputs. They therefore rely on surrogate signals such as code similarity, trajectory matching, or LLM and VLM judges, which can conflate workflow resemblance with task correctness. To address this gap, we introduce GISAgentBench, a benchmark of 349 multi-step GIS tasks curated from GIS Stack Exchange and instantiated on real public data across six selected geographic areas of interest. Each task ships with an executable reference trajectory and an exact ground truth output file, enabling strict, deterministic, tolerance-aware output matching beyond LLM judging. Evaluations of six LLM models reveal that realistic GIS workflows remain challenging: the best agent completes only 32.7% of tasks under strict tolerance-aware scoring, although most models produce outputs that are close to the ground truth.
Results show that failures mainly stem from incomplete evidence acquisition from such a large multimodal database, imprecise tool use and weak constraint integration rather than model size or reasoning length, suggesting that future progress requires effective grounded planning instead of scaling alone.
Zhen Dong, Yuning Peng, Yu-Tao Shi et al.· 0 citations
This work proposes UrbanDS, a graph-guided LLM multi-agent system for data-intensive urban tasks, and constructs UrbanDS-Bench, an urban data science benchmark covering representative data analysis and modeling tasks.
Zhilun Zhou, Jianghao Yu, Yuming Lin et al.· arXiv.org· 0 citations
This work presents UrbanTrace, a visual analytics system that transforms manual spatial data-wrangling into a transparent, node-based collaborative workflow with context-aware AI agents, and demonstrates that UrbanTrace turns spatial aggregation sensitivity from a methodological burden into an exploratory visual asset.
Sonia Castelo, Eden Wu, J. Rulff et al.· arXiv.org· 0 citations
This review synthesises that literature and argues that it has converged on a common architecture with a common limit, and surveys the open geospatial foundation models that now form the practical substrate for EO modelling, arguing that adaptation strategy rather than architecture is the under-searched design variable...
Salah Mohammed, Awad Al-Heejawi, Valentas Gružauskas· 0 citations
This work proposes Urban-Agent, a tool-augmented agent framework for cross-system urban tasks that couples the cognitive and reasoning capabilities of a large language model with a tool-set supporting code execution, API calls, and Model Context Protocol.
Jiayu Cao, Xing-Yuan Zeng, Fei-Yue Li et al.· 0 citations
It is argued that future progress depends less on incremental accuracy gains than on reproducible multi-source workflows, explicit uncertainty, trustworthy and explainable geospatial artificial intelligence, privacy-preserving governance, interoperable standards and evaluation in the institutions that ultimately use th...
Yashvardhan Singh, Divya Singh, Sakshi Shukla et al.· Advances in Research· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.