PilotBench: A Benchmark for General Aviation Agents with Safety Constraints
Organizations: School of Computing, National University of Singapore, China · School of Informatics, Xiamen University, China · CESS, Beihang University, China
Abstract
As Large Language Models (LLMs) advance toward embodied AI agents operating in physical environments, a fundamental question emerges: can models trained on text corpora reliably reason about complex physics while adhering to safety constraints? We address this through PilotBench, a benchmark evaluating LLMs on safety-critical flight trajectory and attitude prediction. Built from 708 real-world general aviation trajectories spanning nine operationally distinct flight phases with synchronized 34-channel telemetry, PilotBench systematically probes the intersection of semantic understanding and physics-governed prediction through comparative analysis of LLMs and traditional forecasters. We introduce Pilot-Score, a composite metric balancing 60% regression accuracy with 40% instruction adherence and safety compliance. Comparative evaluation across 41 models uncovers a Precision-Controllability Dichotomy: traditional forecasters achieve superior MAE of 7.01 but lack semantic reasoning capabilities, while LLMs gain controllability with 86--89% instruction-following at the cost of 11--14 MAE precision. Phase-stratified analysis further exposes a Dynamic Complexity Gap-LLM performance degrades sharply in high-workload phases such as Climb and Approach, suggesting brittle implicit physics models. These empirical discoveries motivate hybrid architectures combining LLMs' symbolic reasoning with specialized forecasters' numerical precision. PilotBench provides a rigorous foundation for advancing embodied AI in safety-constrained domains.
Figures & tables
| Regression Error | Instruction Following | Pilot-Score | ||||||
| Model | MAE | RMSE | Overall | Field Comp. | Field Valid | Format | Overall | |
| Qwen3-32B | 9.5409 | 14.7005 | 85.43 | 100.0 | 91.5 | 100.0 | 97.43 | 90.23 |
| Qwen2.5-72B-Instruct | 11.9144 | 16.3591 | 83.20 | 100.0 | 88.8 | 100.0 | 96.64 | 88.58 |
| DeepSeek-V3 | 11.9410 | 16.3006 | 83.19 | 100.0 | 86.7 | 100.0 | 96.00 | 88.31 |
| GPT-4o-mini | 12.1116 | 16.5832 | 82.99 | 99.8 | 86.3 | 99.8 | 95.74 | 88.09 |
| GPT-o3-mini | 10.9403 | 15.0377 | 84.24 | 100.0 | 76.8 | 100.0 | 93.05 | 87.76 |
AI Agent Safety Benchmarks
AI agent safety benchmarks measure whether tool-using and embodied AI systems act safely across realistic tasks and interactions.
See all 208 papers