MapReason-OSM: Can Vision-Language Models Make Graph-Verifiable Mobility Decisions from Street Maps ?

Recent advancements in LVLMs necessitate robust benchmarks for complex, visually grounded reasoning. A critical limitation is identified in many document understanding benchmarks: visual content is often reducible to text, enabling high performance without genuine visual grounding. To address this limitation, OmniMapBench is introduced to foster visual-centric reasoning for map documents. The benchmark comprises 2,096 manually annotated question-answer pairs across 1,603 map documents from nine categories. It is designed to probe a hierarchy of skills, ranging from perception to multi-step visual reasoning. To quantify benchmark properties, a simple yet effective benchmark-level metric is proposed: the Visual Dependency Index (VDI), defined as the accuracy drop when images are replaced with question-agnostic descriptions. OmniMapBench exhibits higher VDI than established benchmarks, which quantitatively validates its focus on irreducible visual reasoning. Comprehensive evaluations of 25 leading LVLMs are conducted on OmniMapBench. A significant performance gap is observed, with the top-performing model achieving only 75.03% accuracy. This result underscores the challenges posed by OmniMapBench to current LVLMs. This work aims to catalyze progress in visual-centric reasoning for document understanding of LVLMs. The dataset and code are publicly available at https://github.com/SIGMME/OmniMapBench.

Spatial planning maps are central to territorial governance, translating planning objectives, regulations, and spatial strategies into visual forms for decision-making, public communication, and institutional coordination. Their interpretation, however, requires fine-grained visual perception, spatial reasoning, and policy-informed professional judgment, creating major challenges for both human learners and AI systems. With the rapid progress of Vision-Language Models (VLMs), their use in urban planning analysis is gaining attention, yet existing multimodal benchmarks mainly target general visual understanding and overlook the domain-specific cognitive processes of planning practice. To address this gap, we introduce PlanBench-V, the first comprehensive benchmark for evaluating VLMs in spatial planning map interpretation. We first build the Spatial Planning Map Database (SPMD), an expert-annotated dataset of 223 planning maps and 1629 question-answer pairs curated by professional planners, covering diverse geographic regions and cartographic styles. We then propose a theory-informed evaluation framework assessing four progressive capabilities: Perception, Reasoning, Association, and Implementation, corresponding to the cognitive pipeline of planning map interpretation. Extensive experiments across two generations of VLMs show clear progress but persistent limitations. The best 2026 agentic reasoning model, Qwen3.6-Plus, substantially outperforms the best 2025 model, GPT-4o, by 27%. Nevertheless, all models still struggle with implementation-oriented tasks requiring evaluative judgment, policy sensitivity, and constraint-aware decision-making. These findings reveal fundamental limitations of current VLMs in professional planning contexts and highlight the need for domain-adaptive multimodal reasoning frameworks. Code and data are available at https://plangpt.github.io.

Zero-shot waypoint navigation requires vision-language models to select, from the current first-person observation, a sequence of spatial actions that is feasible for the agent and reaches the goal, placing joint demands on the integrated spatial intelligence of today's foundation VLMs. Existing spatial-intelligence benchmarks primarily evaluate isolated judgments of relations, directions, or targets and therefore do not directly measure the integrated navigation ability required to combine target recognition, action-consequence assessment, distance estimation, and path planning. To fill this evaluation gap, we introduce EgoPathBench, a dataset and five-task benchmark for first-person waypoint decision-making. Each question presents an egocentric RGB image, a natural-language goal, and numbered visible waypoints; a model returns traversable candidates or an ordered route. Predictions are evaluated for candidate feasibility, adjacent-edge legality, and goal arrival under point-agent or embodied geometry. EgoPathBench contains 31,852 training, 1,345 validation, and 1,111 benchmark questions and retains at least one geometrically verified reference route for every route question. Across nine VLMs, the highest EgoPath Score is only 28.3. The top-ranked model reaches 35.9% success on Point Path, but only 2.9% and 4.0% on Embodied Path and Intent Path, respectively, showing that current models remain limited in forming complete, goal-consistent routes under embodiment constraints. Beyond the evaluation data, we release the corresponding training resource. Fine-tuning Qwen 3.5 4B on the released training split raises its EgoPath Score from 3.9 to 38.9 and improves all four reported evaluations across three external spatial benchmarks, with gains of 1.4--9.6 points.