Why Cognitive Robotics Matters: Lessons from OntoAgent and LLM Deployment in HARMONIC for Safety-Critical Robot Teaming

In order to flexibly act in an everyday environment, a robotic agent needs a variety of cognitive capabilities that enable it to reason about plans and perform execution recovery. Large language models (LLMs) have been shown to demonstrate emergent cognitive aspects, such as reasoning and language understanding; however, the ability to control embodied robotic agents requires reliably bridging high-level language to low-level functionalities for perception and control. In this paper, we investigate the extent to which an LLM can serve as a core component for planning and execution reasoning in a cognitive robot architecture. For this purpose, we propose a cognitive architecture in which an agentic LLM serves as the core component for planning and reasoning, while components for working and episodic memories support learning from experience and adaptation. An instance of the architecture is then used to control a mobile manipulator in a simulated household environment, where environment interaction is done through a set of high-level tools for perception, reasoning, navigation, grasping, and placement, all of which are made available to the LLM-based agent. We evaluate our proposed system on two household tasks (object placement and object swapping), which evaluate the agent's reasoning, planning, and memory utilisation. The results demonstrate that the LLM-driven agent can complete structured tasks and exhibits emergent adaptation and memory-guided planning, but also reveal significant limitations, such as hallucinations about the task success and poor instruction following by refusing to acknowledge and complete sequential tasks. These findings highlight both the potential and challenges of employing LLMs as embodied cognitive controllers for autonomous robots.

LLM agents follow a practical execution loop in digital environments: they reason over structured states, invoke tools, inspect feedback, and revise actions. Extending this loop to physical robots is difficult because physical execution is continuous, embodiment-dependent, uncertain, and constrained by safety. Existing embodied-AI systems have advanced manipulation, spatial understanding, navigation, and humanoid control, but these capabilities often remain specialized modules or loosely coupled decision loops. In this work, we introduce HoloAgent-0, a unified embodied agent framework for real-world robot deployment. Embodied AgentOS converts language instructions into executable skill graphs, schedules robot resources, monitors execution, and triggers clarification or re-planning from runtime feedback. HoloAgent-0 organizes heterogeneous robot models and controllers through three coupled layers: Embodied AgentOS for closed-loop execution, 3D spatial memory for physical world grounding, and embodied skills for robot action. We deploy HoloAgent-0 on real hardware and evaluate its spatial memory, long-horizon navigation, and closed-loop execution across motion generation, object search, cross-robot coordination, and mobile manipulation.

Agentic large language model (LLM) systems are commonly implemented as an LLM in a loop with Planning, Memory, Tools, and Control Flow. This application-focused view connects agentic LLM research with deployable systems and leaves open how such systems should be evaluated beyond end-to-end task success. Building on this view, we define agentic cognitive depth as a trajectory-level profile across five operational criteria. The profile contains context sensitivity ($C$), temporal continuity ($T$), multimodal coordination ($M$), adaptive interaction ($A$), and metacognitive monitoring ($Mc$). The first four criteria measure how well Control Flow, Memory, Tools, and Planning are used across a trajectory. The fifth measures whether the system monitors and regulates the full run. For each criterion, we give operational proxies and a perturbation procedure, then connect the profile to the agent's world model. We provide the structure needed to extend benchmarks such as GAIA, SWE-bench, WebArena, and TRIP-Bench with per-criterion diagnostics. Symbolic verifiers, structured memory, planner coupling, and tool constraints provide practical ways to build and test these capacities.