LLMs for Text-Based Exploration and Navigation Under Partial Observability
Organizations: AKIS – Interdisciplinary Institute for Applied AI and Data Science Ruhr, Bochum University of Applied Sciences, Bochum, Germany
Abstract
Exploration and goal-directed navigation in unknown layouts are central to inspection, logistics, and search-and-rescue. We ask whether large language models (LLMs) can function as text-only controllers under partial observability -- without code execution, tools, or program synthesis. We introduce a reproducible benchmark with oracle localisation in fixed ASCII gridworlds: each step reveals only a local window around the agent and the model must select one of UP/RIGHT/DOWN/LEFT. Nine contemporary LLMs ranging from open/proprietary, dense / Mixture of Experts and instruction- vs. reasoning-tuned are evaluated on two tasks across three layouts of increasing difficulty: Exploration (maximising revealed cells) and Navigation (reach the goal on the shortest path). The experimental results are evaluated on quantitative metrics including success rate, efficiency such as normalised coverage and path length vs. oracle as well as qualitative analysis. Reasoning-tuned models reliably complete navigation across all layouts, yet remain less efficient than oracle paths. Few-shot demonstrations in the prompt chiefly help these Reasoning-tuned models by reducing invalid moves and shortening paths, while classic dense instruction models remain inconsistent. We observe characteristic action priors (UP/RIGHT) that can induce looping under partial observability. Overall, training regimen and test-time deliberation predict control ability better than raw parameter count. These findings suggest lightweight hybridisation with classical online planners as a practical route to deployable partial map systems.
Figures & tables
| Exploration | Navigation | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model | 0 - Shot | 5 - Shot | 0 - Shot | 5 - Shot |
| Random Actions | 53.71 % | 8.00 % (282) | ||
| GPT-5 (Reasoning) | 100.00 % | 100.00 % | 100.00 % (26) | 100.00 % (26) |
| GPT-OSS-120B (Reasoning) | 100.00 % | 100.00 % | 100.00 % (29) | 100.00 % (28) |
| GPT-5-mini (Reasoning) | 99.47 % | 100.00 % | 100.00 % (60) | 100.00 % (28) |
| Gemma-3-27B-Instruct | 39.97 % | 61.23 % | 100.00 % (106) | 100.00 % (37) |
| Exploration | Navigation | |||
| Model | 0 - Shot | 5 - Shot | 0 - Shot | 5 - Shot |
| Random Actions | 45.76 % | 3.00 % (316) | ||
| GPT-5 (Reasoning) | 100.00 % | 100.00 % | 100.00 % (48) | 100.00 % (44) |
| GPT-OSS-120B (Reasoning) | 99.50 % | 99.94 % | 100.00 % (52) | 100.00 % (46) |
| GPT-5-mini (Reasoning) | 99.00 % | 100.00 % | 0.00 % ( ) | 0.00 % ( ) |
| Qwen3-QwQ-32B | 22.70 % | 68.22 % | 0.00 % ( ) | 30.77 % (122) |
| Exploration | Navigation | |||
| Model | 0 - Shot | 5 - Shot | 0 - Shot | 5 - Shot |
| Random Actions | 35.64 % | 7.80 % (283) | ||
| GPT-5 (Reasoning) | 89.22 % | 100.00 % | 100.00 % (32) | 100.00 % (32) |
| GPT-5-mini (Reasoning) | 62.91 % | 83.21 % | 100.00 % (56) | 100.00 % (50) |
| GPT-OSS-120B (Reasoning) | 58.56 % | 45.21 % | 100.00 % (43) | 100.00 % (40) |
| DeepSeek-R1 (685B / 37B) | 42.97 % | 51.55 % | 30.00 % (207) | 53.85 % (123) |
Language Model-Based Control
Language model-based control uses language models to interpret goals, choose actions, and steer AI systems or physical processes.
See all 180 papers