cs.AIMay 12, 2026

Can LLM Agents Respond to Disasters? Benchmarking Heterogeneous Geospatial Reasoning in Emergency Operations

Authors: Junjue Wang, Weihao Xuan, Heli Qi, Pengyu Dai, Kunyi Liu, Hongruixuan Chen, Zhuo Zheng, Junshi Xia, +2 more

Organizations: 1The University of Tokyo · 2RIKEN AIP · 3Waseda University · 4Stanford University

Abstract

Operational disaster response goes beyond damage assessment, requiring responders to integrate multi-sensor signals, reason over road networks, populations and key facilities, plan evacuations, and produce actionable reports. However, prior work largely isolates remote-sensing perception or evaluates generic tool use, leaving the end-to-end workflows of emergency operations underexplored. In this paper, we introduce Disaster Operational Response Agent benchmark (DORA), the first agentic benchmark for end-to-end disaster response: 515 expert-authored tasks across 45 real-world disaster events spanning 10 types, paired with expert-verified, replayable gold trajectories totaling 3,500 tool-call steps. Tasks span five dimensions that cover the operational disaster-response pipeline: disaster perception, spatial relational analysis, rescue and evacuation planning, temporal evolution reasoning, and multi-modal report synthesis. Agents compose calls from a 108-tool MCP library over heterogeneous geospatial data: optical, SAR, and multi-spectral imagery across single-, bi-, and multi-temporal sequences (0.015-10m GSD), complemented by elevation and social vector layers. We comprehensively evaluate 13 frontier LLMs on our benchmark, revealing three persistent challenges: 1) disaster-domain grounding exposes unique failure modes (damage-semantic grounding, sensor-modality mismatch, and disaster-pipeline composition); 2) agents are doubly bottlenecked by tool selection and argument grounding, where gold tool-order hints improve accuracy by only 1.08-4.40%, and alternative scaffolds yield at most a 3.24% gain; 3) compositional fragility scales with trajectory length, the agent-to-gold gap widening from 7% to 56% on long pipelines. DORA establishes a rigorous testbed for operationally reliable disaster-response agents.

Explore similar work

CardsList
Jun 15, 2026cs.CV

GeoDisaster: Benchmarking Orchestrated Agents for Operational Disaster Geo-Intelligence

Remote-sensing vision-language models (RS-VLMs) have advanced Earth-observation analysis toward visual interpretation and instruction-following, yet fall short of operational geo-intelligence, which demands tool-grounded spatial reasoning and structured, evidence-backed decisions. We introduce GeoDisaster, an operational geospatial disaster reasoning benchmark with 2,921 verified instances across 43 question types and five task families: deforestation monitoring, multi-hazard analysis, building-damage assessment, flood-safe routing, and Sentinel-1 SAR flood monitoring. Instances integrate heterogeneous EO/GIS evidence-optical and SAR imagery, raster masks, vector geometries, road networks, and exposure layers-spanning hazard detection, damage assessment, exposure estimation, and diagnostic report generation. Ground-truth answers are grounded in executable geospatial workflows and deterministic consistency checks, removing the need for language-model annotation. We further propose an orchestrated multi-agent framework with 18 disaster-oriented tools, where role-specialized agents coordinate through explicit execution contracts, aligned via Role-Contract Expectation Alignment (RCEA): failure-aware supervised fine-tuning combined with contract-grounded reinforcement learning over dense step-level signals. Experiments show that GeoDisaster challenges existing RS-VLMs and agentic systems, while RCEA improves tool use, evidence grounding, state consistency, and decision generation.
Maram Hasan, Aman Verma, Savitra Roy +5
DisastersGeospatialEarth ObservationVision-Language Model ReasoningSpatial ReasoningSafe Reinforcement Learning
AskPDF
Jun 4, 2026cs.CV

DisasterBench: A Multimodal Benchmark for UAV-Based Disaster Response in Complex Environments

When a disaster unfolds, responders must answer not only what is happening, but also why it is happening, what will happen next, and what to do now, often from noisy low-altitude UAV views and under tight on-site compute constraints. However, most existing multimodal benchmarks emphasize perception (e.g., recognition/description), cover limited disaster types, and provide insufficient support for the multi-stage reasoning required in practical emergency response. We introduce DisasterBench, a multi-stage multimodal reasoning benchmark for UAV-Based disaster response in complex environments. DisasterBench spans 14 disaster-related scene types and 9 response-critical tasks across pre-, during-, and post-disaster stages, with fine-grained disaster-task mappings that explicitly test causal attribution, propagation prediction, damage analysis, and decision-oriented reasoning. To enable reasoning on the edge, we further propose DisasterVL, a lightweight multimodal model optimized with a three-stage pipeline combining domain instruction tuning, chain-of-thought-guided multimodal alignment, and reinforcement learning-based policy optimization. Experiments across 21 popular MLLMs show that our 2B-parameter DisasterVL outperforms all evaluated open-source models and substantially narrows the gap to state-of-the-art closed-source models, achieving GPT-4o-comparable reasoning accuracy with superior efficiency. The project page is available at https://github.com/TanmouTT/DisasterBench.
Tan Zhang, Quanyou Li, Lu Zhang +3
DisastersMultimodal Reasoning BenchmarksMultimodal BenchmarksDynamic Environments
AskPDF
May 27, 2026cs.CL

DisasterBench: Benchmarking LLM Planning under Typed Tool Interface Constraints

Disasters cause severe societal impacts, demanding rapid coordination of heterogeneous AI tools, from satellite analysis to flood prediction and damage assessment, into coherent multi-step workflows. As LLMs increasingly serve as orchestrators of such pipelines, effective coordination requires more than selecting semantically plausible tools: LLMs must generate executable workflows with correct parameter binding and dependency propagation. We introduce DisasterBench, a benchmark for evaluating structured multi-agent planning over semantically similar but operationally distinct disaster-response tools. To enable step-level failure attribution, we further propose First-Point-of-Failure (FPoF), which localizes the earliest root cause in a predicted workflow, separating primary errors from downstream cascading effects. Our evaluation reveals three findings: planning method effectiveness depends strongly on model capacity; tool mismatch and parameter-binding errors dominate first failures, revealing semantic grounding and execution consistency as distinct bottlenecks; and verbose intermediate reasoning can create instruction clash with structured output requirements, disrupting plan generation. Together, these findings highlight a fundamental gap between semantic reasoning and execution-grounded coordination, underscoring the need for planning frameworks that jointly model semantic intent, execution constraints, and workflow consistency. Code, data, and evaluation resources are available at: https://github.com/TamuChen18/DisasterBench_Open
Zhitong Chen, Kai Yin, Weifeng Zhang +7
Large Language Model PlanningStep-Level Failure AttributionDisastersGlobal Coordination
AskPDF