Mind the Gap Between Spatial Reasoning and Acting! Step-by-Step Evaluation of Agents With Spatial-Gym
arXiv AIArchived Apr 13, 2026✓ Full text saved
arXiv:2604.09338v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Spatial reasoning is central to navigation and robotics, yet measuring model capabilities on these tasks remains difficult. Existing benchmarks evaluate models in a one-shot setting, requiring full solution generation in a single response, unlike humans, who work in interactive environments step-by-step. We introduce Spatial-Gym, a Gymnasium environment that isolates spatial constraint reasoning by testing pathfinding in 2D-grid puzzles as a sequen
Full text archived locally
✦ AI Summary· Claude Sonnet
Computer Science > Artificial Intelligence
[Submitted on 10 Apr 2026]
Mind the Gap Between Spatial Reasoning and Acting! Step-by-Step Evaluation of Agents With Spatial-Gym
Lars Benedikt Kaesberg, Tianyu Yang, Niklas Bauer, Terry Ruas, Jan Philip Wahle, Bela Gipp
Spatial reasoning is central to navigation and robotics, yet measuring model capabilities on these tasks remains difficult. Existing benchmarks evaluate models in a one-shot setting, requiring full solution generation in a single response, unlike humans, who work in interactive environments step-by-step. We introduce Spatial-Gym, a Gymnasium environment that isolates spatial constraint reasoning by testing pathfinding in 2D-grid puzzles as a sequential decision task with optional backtracking. We evaluate eight models in three settings (one-shot, step-by-step, step-by-step with backtracking) against human, random, and A* baselines on 500 episodes. The best model, GPT-OSS 120B, achieves a solve rate of 16.0%, 82 points below the human baseline (98.0%). Step-by-step format helps weaker models (up to +5.4%) by removing formatting errors, but hurts stronger models (up to 5.6%) by constraining global planning. Backtracking improves episode completion, but increases solve rate only for weaker models; stronger models rarely backtrack and do not benefit from it. Our experiments have three key findings: (1) models fail to scale reasoning effort with difficulty, (2) vision models receiving images of the spatial environment reduce solve rate by 73%, and (3) extended chain-of-thought reasoning retains a 3-5x accuracy advantage over standard inference even in the step-by-step setting. Spatial-Gym enables diagnosis of model limitations and provides a framework for improving spatial reasoning through reinforcement learning.
Subjects: Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Computation and Language (cs.CL)
Cite as: arXiv:2604.09338 [cs.AI]
(or arXiv:2604.09338v1 [cs.AI] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2604.09338
Focus to learn more
Submission history
From: Lars Kaesberg [view email]
[v1] Fri, 10 Apr 2026 14:05:50 UTC (1,995 KB)
Access Paper:
view license
Current browse context:
cs.AI
< prev | next >
new | recent | 2026-04
Change to browse by:
cs
cs.CL
References & Citations
NASA ADS
Google Scholar
Semantic Scholar
Export BibTeX Citation
Bookmark
Bibliographic Tools
Bibliographic and Citation Tools
Bibliographic Explorer Toggle
Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)
Connected Papers Toggle
Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)
Litmaps Toggle
Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)
scite.ai Toggle
scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)
Code, Data, Media
Demos
Related Papers
About arXivLabs
Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)