Formal, Executable and Explainable Runtime Monitoring of Spoken Air Traffic Control Operational Procedures

Pilot readback of Air Traffic Control (ATC) voice instructions is a primary safeguard against miscommunication in air transportation. However, readback anomalies remain implicated in approximately 80% of aviation incidents. This vulnerability is further exacerbated by rising traffic volume and elevated cognitive workload, thereby motivating automated readback monitoring by machine. Traditional rule-based and machine learning approaches struggle to generalize across the highly variable and evolving phraseology of air traffic controller-pilot communications. While Large Language Models (LLMs) have opened a new avenue through their strong reasoning and generalization capabilities, existing approaches still face deployment and computational barriers in practice. In this work, we propose Semantic reasoning for Communication via Open-set Plug-in with Examples (SCOPE), a novel lightweight-training LLM framework that advances both the efficiency and accuracy of machine-based ATC readback monitoring. The core idea is to couple a plug-in open-set classifier with a carefully designed in-context learning mechanism on top of a frozen LLM. Extensive experiments on the semi-synthetic communication dataset show that SCOPE attains superior accuracy while delivering the low-latency response required for operational environments. Under a few-shot setting, SCOPE achieves 91.05% accuracy in open-set detection and corrects 96.63% of anomalous readbacks, thereby outperforming the strongest available baselines while providing explanations for its decisions. These findings demonstrate the potential of our framework as a practical pathway toward interpretable and controllable ATC readback monitoring.

Air Traffic Control (ATC) is a safety-critical domain in which incorrect interpretation of instructions may lead to severe operational consequences. While large language models (LLMs) demonstrate strong general performance, their reliability in operational ATC environments remains unclear. Existing evaluation approaches, largely based on aggregate metrics such as F1 or macro accuracy, treat all errors uniformly and fail to account for the asymmetric consequences of high-risk semantic mistakes (e.g., incorrect runway identifiers or movement constraints). To address this gap, we propose a safety-oriented, consequence-aware evaluation framework tailored to ATC operations. Our results reveal that while current LLMs achieve reasonable aggregate accuracy, their operational reliability is severely limited. Evaluated on clean transcripts, the peak Risk Score reaches only 0.69, with most models scoring below 0.6 despite high macro-F1 performance. Further analysis shows that errors concentrate in high-impact entities despite relatively stable action-type classification, indicating structural grounding deficiencies. These findings highlight the necessity of consequence-aware evaluation protocols for the responsible deployment of AI-assisted ATC systems.

Aviation knowledge question answering cannot directly assess the operational effectiveness and safety compliance of large language models throughout aircraft emergency procedures. We introduce AeroCopilotBench and its executable cockpit environment, ACOE, which define state-transition rules, task goals, and trajectory-level safety constraints based on aircraft-specific Pilot's Operating Handbooks (POHs). The benchmark comprises 12 scenario templates and 73 tasks across two aircraft types, evaluating task completion, safety compliance, execution discipline, and repeatability. Across repeated evaluations of 12 models, the highest safety-gated success rate is 72.6%. Most failed episodes achieve all critical goals but do not satisfy all remaining terminal goals. Across repeated runs, models still omit steps that they execute in other runs of the same task. Analysis of failed trajectories further reveals that some reasons for actions that conflict with the aircraft's POH recur across models. These results expose shortcomings in complete procedure execution, consistency across runs, and aircraft-specific emergency response.