Large Language Models in Transportation Systems Management and Operations: From Text Reasoning to Multi-modal Decision Support

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.

Large language models (LLMs) and multimodal large models (MLLMs) are increasingly used for transportation tasks such as regulation question answering, traffic management support, engineering review, and autonomous-driving scene reasoning. Yet transportation workflows are rule-intensive, computation-intensive, safety-critical, and inherently multimodal. Existing general benchmarks provide limited evidence of whether a model can apply regulations correctly, perform verifiable engineering calculations, or interpret traffic scenes reliably, while the small number of public transportation benchmarks remain narrow in scope and rarely support fine-grained diagnosis across text, images, and point-cloud data. To address this gap, we present TRIP-Evaluate, an open multimodal benchmark for large models in transportation. The benchmark organizes 837 items using a role-task-knowledge taxonomy that covers vehicle, traffic-management, traveler, and planning-and-design functions. Each item is annotated with capability, modality, and difficulty labels, enabling diagnosis from overall accuracy down to specific failure modes. The current release includes 596 text items, 198 image items, and 43 point-cloud items. TRIP-Evaluate also standardizes item construction, quality control, prompting, decoding, and scoring to improve cross-model comparability. Results on a diverse panel of models show that text-based performance is improving, but substantial weaknesses remain in multi-step engineering calculation, rule-constrained reasoning, multimodal scene understanding, and point-cloud understanding. Overall, TRIP-Evaluate provides a reproducible, diagnosable, and engineering-aligned evaluation baseline for model selection, regression testing, and safer deployment in transportation applications.

Foundation models, including large language models (LLMs) and vision-language models (VLMs), are increasingly used for transportation management center (TMC) tasks such as anomaly detection, incident reporting, and traveler information. Deploying multiple such models across TMC functions raises a portfolio question: which model should serve each function, in which deployment mode, and under what shared hardware budget? We formulate this as the Foundation Model Deployment Portfolio (FMDP) problem, a mixed-integer program minimizing total cost of ownership (TCO) subject to per-function quality, latency, and safety constraints over shared GPU capacity. We prove the problem NP-hard by reduction from the 0-1 knapsack problem and propose a polynomial-time greedy heuristic. In an illustrative case study with five TMC functions and 19 candidate (model, mode) pairs, FMDP identifies a mixed portfolio costing $34/mo (97% below the cheapest feasible all-closed-API baseline) by routing four functions to open-source APIs and the one function whose quality floor no open-source model meets to a closed API. Break-even analysis shows that on-premise GPU investment becomes reasonable only above approximately 309 vision queries/hour or if API prices double.