Large Multimodal Agents for Intelligent Transportation Systems: Architectures, Evidence, and Deployment Challenges

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2608.08184v1
• Date: Sat, 08 Aug 2026 15:22:40 GMT
• Title: Large Multimodal Agents for Intelligent Transportation Systems: Architectures, Evidence, and Deployment Challenges
• Abstract summary: This review provides an auditable evidence map of 42 primary study families released between January 2023 and 3 August 2026.<n>It distinguishes model-level, system-level, and hybrid multimodality and classifies each family by system architecture and action authority.
• Score: 10.296219658873676
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Large multimodal agents (LMAs) are increasingly proposed for intelligent transportation systems (ITS), but existing studies often conflate multimodality, agency, empirical performance, and deployment readiness. This review provides an auditable evidence map of 42 primary study families released between January 2023 and 3 August 2026 within a corpus of 91 mapped sources. It distinguishes model-level, system-level, and hybrid multimodality and classifies each family by system architecture and action authority. Evidence is assessed independently through functional capability (C0-C3), validation setting (E0-E4), three evidence propositions (P1-P3), and eight methodological-concern domains (Q1-Q8). Transportation semantics (P1) are directly evaluated in 23 families and multidimensional integration (P3) in 24; 19 families directly evaluate both. Evidence reconciliation (P2) remains unresolved because no family demonstrates the complete provenance-challenge-handling-comparison-outcome chain. Fourteen families reach C3, but 13 remain at E2; only one reaches E3 and none reaches E4. Across ITS domains, LMAs are best supported for semantic interpretation, intent translation, evidence organisation, scenario authoring, explanation, and specialist-tool coordination. Numerical forecasting, optimisation, simulation fidelity, hard constraints, low-level control, safety fallback, and final authority should remain with independently verifiable specialist systems or accountable humans. The review therefore supports bounded orchestration rather than replacement and provides a matched comparative evaluation protocol and staged roadmap for accountable deployment. The living evidence repository is available at https://github.com/pangjunbiao/ITS-LMA-Review.

Related papers

• Deep Academic Survey: Stateful Agentic Closed-Loop Paradigm for Academic Survey Automation [60.151050016855834]
  DAS is a stateful agentic framework for generating publication-oriented academic surveys.<n>Its key idea is to separate reusable paper analysis from topic-specific manuscript construction.<n>DAS achieves the highest average in all four dimensions, with an overall score of 4.34 compared with 4.03 for the strongest competitor.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-18T17:29:00Z)
• From Interpretability to Control: Insights from Six Years of the TrustNLP Workshop [63.00693129203923]
  The Workshop on Trustworthy Natural Language Processing has grown from 8 proceedings papers to 41 over six editions.<n>We synthesize insights from all 144 proceedings papers, classifying them along six trust dimensions grounded in established frameworks.<n>Analysis from the classification study reveals that truthfulness is the fastest-growing dimension (absent in 2021-2022, comprising 37% of papers by 2025-2026)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-11T17:30:16Z)
• From Isolated Tasks to Structured Capabilities: A Multilayer Taxonomy for Large Language Models [41.36461541603076]
  Large language model (LLM) evaluation spans diverse tasks and benchmarks.<n>Evidence remains organized around tasks rather than the capabilities they probe.<n>We introduce a multi-layer taxonomy of 14 capability domains and 91 subskills.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-24T10:49:50Z)
• ScientistOne: Towards Human-Level Autonomous Research via Chain-of-Evidence [57.37494162084001]
  Chain-of-Evidence (CoE) is a verifiability framework requiring every claim to be traceable to its evidence source.<n>CoE Audit is a post-hoc audit whose four integrity checks -- score verification, specification violation, reference verification, and method-code alignment -- apply uniformly to all systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-25T21:30:27Z)
• Measuring the Authority Stack of AI Systems: Empirical Analysis of 366,120 Forced-Choice Responses Across 8 AI Models [3.7184769644515896]
  We present the first large-scale empirical mapping of AI decision-making across all three layers of the Authority Stack framework.<n>We evaluated 8 major AI models at temperature 0, yielding 366,120 total responses.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-13T09:13:32Z)
• From Reasoning to Agentic: Credit Assignment in Reinforcement Learning for Large Language Models [3.651838585096184]
  Reinforcement learning (RL) for large language models increasingly relies on sparse, outcome-level rewards.<n>We survey 47 CA methods published between 2024 and early 2026, organizing them in a two-dimensional taxonomy by assignment.<n>We contribute three reusable resources: (1) a structured, machine-readable paper inventory with taxonomy labels, baseline families, and evidence levels; (2) a reporting checklist for future CA papers to identify systematic methodological gaps; and (3) a benchmark protocol specification with task families, metadata requirements, and controlled bifurcation tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-10T16:17:44Z)
• Claw-Eval: Toward Trustworthy Evaluation of Autonomous Agents [66.97968363332465]
  We introduce Claw-Eval, an end-to-end evaluation suite addressing all three gaps in agent benchmarks.<n>Claw-Eval comprises 300 human-verified tasks spanning 9 categories across three groups.<n>Every agent action is recorded through three independent evidence channels.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-07T17:43:18Z)
• UGAF-ITS: A Standards Harmonization Framework and Validation Tool for Multi-Framework AI Governance in Distributed Intelligent Transportation Systems [1.1002771741647328]
  UGAF-ITS is a standards harmonization framework that consolidates 154 source obligations into 12 unified controls across eight governance domains.<n>A three-tier operating model allocates each control to the vehicle, edge, or cloud tier where enforcement and defensible evidence production are feasible.<n>An evidence backbone of 20 versioned artifacts supports a single audit package across all three frameworks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-07T09:37:05Z)
• Towards a Science of Scaling Agent Systems [79.64446272302287]
  We formalize a definition for agent evaluation and characterize scaling laws as the interplay between agent quantity, coordination structure, modelic, and task properties.<n>We derive a predictive model using coordination metrics, that cross-validated R2=0, enabling prediction on unseen task domains.<n>We identify three effects: (1) a tool-coordination trade-off: under fixed computational budgets, tool-heavy tasks suffer disproportionately from multi-agent overhead, and (2) a capability saturation: coordination yields diminishing or negative returns once single-agent baselines exceed 45%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-09T06:52:21Z)
• Eigen-1: Adaptive Multi-Agent Refinement with Monitor-Based RAG for Scientific Reasoning [53.45095336430027]
  We develop a unified framework that combines implicit retrieval and structured collaboration.<n>On Humanity's Last Exam (HLE) Bio/Chem Gold, our framework achieves 48.3% accuracy.<n>Results on SuperGPQA and TRQA confirm robustness across domains.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-25T14:05:55Z)
• Law of the Weakest Link: Cross Capabilities of Large Language Models [102.91861246827797]
  We show that Large Language Models (LLMs) exhibit the "Law of the Weakest Link," where cross-capability performance is significantly constrained by the weakest component. These results highlight the under-performance of LLMs in cross-capability tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-30T05:12:01Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.