跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail
← 研踪 PaperTrail

arXiv:2504.12110 · v3

Towards LLM Agents for Earth Observation

首次提交 2025-04-16 22:19
版本更新 2026-10-05 22:43
雷达观测 2026-10-29 03:12
arXiv ↗PDF ↗

摘要

Earth Observation (EO) provides critical planetary data for environmental monitoring, disaster management, climate science, and other scientific domains. In this work we ask: Are AI systems ready for reliable Earth Observation? To answer this, we introduce UnivEARTH, a coding benchmark of 408 yes/no questions from NASA Earth Observatory articles across 7 various topics and over 15 satellite instruments and sources. Using Google Earth Engine API as a tool in a zero-shot setup, LLM agents achieve an accuracy of 40.0% where the code fails to run over 44% of the time. To better understand LLM agent behavior, we also analyze the impact of using the JavaScript API versus Python and the effect of providing documentation. Furthermore, we find that using a Reflexion framework significantly reduces errors: Claude-4.5-Sonnet, Gemini-2.5-Pro, and GPT-5 accuracies rise to around 60%. However, these results remain only marginally above random chance. Taken together, our findings identify significant challenges to be solved before AI agents can automate earth observation, and suggest paths forward.

作者备注:Accepted at ACL 2026 Findings and ICML 2025 Workshop TerraBytes. Project page: https://iandrover.github.io/2025_univearth/

论文发现出处

这些页面提供论文线索,不代表同行评审或质量认证。

AI 论文解读

基于摘要 · 非全文审阅

作者构建了基于NASA地球观测文章与Google Earth Engine的编码基准UnivEARTH,发现零样本LLM智能体在地球观测问答上准确率仅40.0%,使用Reflexion后提升至约60%,但仍仅略高于随机水平。

正在读取账号与研究记录…

版本差异

目前只观测到一个版本,无法比较变化。之后收录新版本时,会在这里对照标题、作者、分类和摘要。

观测到的版本

相邻记录可能跳过中间版本;首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。

v3 · 2026-10-05 22:43 · 最新观测版本

Towards LLM Agents for Earth Observation

Earth Observation (EO) provides critical planetary data for environmental monitoring, disaster management, climate science, and other scientific domains. In this work we ask: Are AI systems ready for reliable Earth Observation? To answer this, we introduce UnivEARTH, a coding benchmark of 408 yes/no questions from NASA Earth Observatory articles across 7 various topics and over 15 satellite instruments and sources. Using Google Earth Engine API as a tool in a zero-shot setup, LLM agents achieve an accuracy of 40.0% where the code fails to run over 44% of the time. To better understand LLM agent behavior, we also analyze the impact of using the JavaScript API versus Python and the effect of providing documentation. Furthermore, we find that using a Reflexion framework significantly reduces errors: Claude-4.5-Sonnet, Gemini-2.5-Pro, and GPT-5 accuracies rise to around 60%. However, these results remain only marginally above random chance. Taken together, our findings identify significant challenges to be solved before AI agents can automate earth observation, and suggest paths forward.

查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗