Ghost in the Minecraft: Generally Capable Agents for Open-World Environments via Large Language Models with Text-based Knowledge and Memory
Open accessAbstract
The captivating realm of Minecraft has attracted substantial research interest in recent years, serving as a rich platform for developing intelligent agents capable of functioning in open-world environments. However, the current research landscape predominantly focuses on specific objectives, such as the popular "ObtainDiamond" task, and has not yet shown effective generalization to a broader spectrum of tasks. Furthermore, the current leading success rate for the "ObtainDiamond" task stands at around 20%, highlighting the limitations of Reinforcement Learning (RL) based controllers used in existing methods. To tackle these challenges, we introduce Ghost in the Minecraft (GITM), a novel framework integrates Large Language Models (LLMs) with text-based knowledge and memory, aiming to create Generally Capable Agents (GCAs) in Minecraft. These agents, equipped with the logic and common sense capabilities of LLMs, can skillfully navigate complex, sparse-reward environments with text-based interactions. We develop a set of structured actions and leverage LLMs to generate action plans for the agents to execute. The resulting LLM-based agent markedly surpasses previous methods, achieving a remarkable improvement of +47.5% in success rate on the "ObtainDiamond" task, demonstrating superior robustness compared to traditional RL-based controllers. Notably, our agent is the first to procure all items in the Minecraft Overworld technology tree, demonstrating its extensive capabilities. GITM does not need any GPU for training, but a single CPU node with 32 CPU cores is enough. This research shows the potential of LLMs in developing capable agents for handling long-horizon, complex tasks and adapting to uncertainties in open-world environments. See the project website at https://github.com/OpenGVLab/GITM.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Recent works have developed more efficient reinforcement learning agents for robotics and embodied AI, focusing on enhancing autonomous agents' abilities for planning, reasoning, and collaboration in embodied environments.
“Recent works have developed more efficient reinforcement learning agents for robotics and embodied artificial intelligence [16,38,78,131-138].The focus is on enhancing autonomous agents' abilities for planning, reasoning, and collaboration in embodied environments.”
From A survey on large language model based autonomous agents (2024) · cites this paper as [16]
The citation is attached to the claim about developing more efficient reinforcement-learning agents. The Introduction (pp. 2–3) instead describes RL agents as inefficient in Minecraft and proposes an LLM-based agent as an alternative; the Abstract (p. 1) likewise identifies GITM as an LLM-based framework, not an RL agent. (LLM, conf=0.87)
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe reflection process can occur hierarchically, meaning that insights can be generated based on existing insights.
“In addition, the reflection process can occur hierarchically, meaning that the insights can be generated based on existing insights.”
From A survey on large language model based autonomous agents (2024) · cites this paper as [16]
Section 3.2 (p. 6) says the planner creates new plans from summarized reference plans and adds successful sequences for future summarization. Section A.4.1 (p. 17) describes repeatedly summarizing sequences held in memory. This supports building on earlier summaries, but the paper does not describe that process as hierarchical reflection or explicitly say that insights are generated from existing insights. (LLM, conf=0.78)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredRealworld simulation evaluates agents within immersive environments like games and interactive simulators, using metrics like task success rate and human similarity based on trajectories and completed objectives.
“In this method, the agents are evaluated within immersive environments like games and interactive simulators.The agents are required to perform tasks autonomously, and then metrics like task success rate and human similarity are leveraged to evaluate the capability of the agents based on their trajectories and completed objectives [16,22,33,38,59,80,122,162,163,164].”
From A survey on large language model based autonomous agents (2024) · cites this paper as [16]
The Experiments section (p. 7) evaluates a Minecraft agent on item-collection tasks using success rate and coverage of the Overworld technology tree. It does not describe human similarity or trajectory-based metrics, or evaluation in interactive simulators beyond Minecraft. (LLM, conf=0.87)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredBy remembering historical information, memory can help to better decide when and how to make explorations, for example, focusing more on previously failed trials or actions with lower exploring frequencies.
“By remembering historical information, the memory can help to better decide when and how to make explorations, for example, focusing more on previously failed trials or actions with lower exploring frequencies [93].”
From A Survey on the Memory Mechanism of Large Language Model-based Agents (2025) · cites this paper as [93]
Section 3.2 (p. 6) says text-based memory retains reference plans from prior experience to help the planner handle similar tasks more efficiently. But A.4.1 (p. 17) specifies that memory stores successful action sequences, not failed trials, and the paper does not describe using exploration frequency to choose actions. Section 4.3 (p. 9) attributes correction of previous mistakes to feedback rather than memory. (LLM, conf=0.88)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredGITM intends to design agents in Minecraft, which can explore in complex and sparse-reward environments; the agents draw from the online Minecraft Wiki and craft recipes to provide an infinite source of knowledge for their navigation.
“GITM [93] intends to design agents in Minecraft, which can explore in complex and sparse-reward environments. The agents draw from the online Minecraft Wiki and craft recipes to provide an infinite source of knowledge for their navigation.”
From A Survey on the Memory Mechanism of Large Language Model-based Agents (2025) · cites this paper as [93]
The Abstract (p. 1) says GITM aims to create Minecraft agents capable of navigating complex, sparse-reward environments. Section 3.1 (p. 5) says it uses the online Minecraft Wiki and crafting recipes as an exhaustive knowledge source for goal decomposition, but does not describe that source as infinite. (LLM, conf=0.85)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Agents can directly alter environment states by actions, such as moving positions, collecting items, and constructing buildings.
“Agents can directly alter environment states by actions, such as moving their positions, collecting items, and constructing buildings.”
From A survey on large language model based autonomous agents (2024) · cites this paper as [16]
Ghost incorporates feedback into reasoning and action taking; feedback encompasses environment states and success/failure information for each executed action.
“Similar to Voyager, Ghost [16] also incorporates feedback into the reasoning and action taking processes.This feedback encompasses the environment states as well as the success and failure information for each executed action.”
From A survey on large language model based autonomous agents (2024) · cites this paper as [16]
In GITM, the improved agent capability comes from the specially designed memory accumulation and utilization mechanisms.
“In this process, the improved agent capability comes from the specially designed memory accumulation and utilization mechanisms.”
From A survey on large language model based autonomous agents (2024) · cites this paper as [16]
Many researchers use simulation environments like ALFWorld, IGLU, and Minecraft as benchmarks to evaluate agent capabilities.
“For example, many researchers use simulation environments like ALFWorld [59], IGLU [122], and Minecraft [16, 33,38] as benchmarks to evaluate the agent capabilities.”
From A survey on large language model based autonomous agents (2024) · cites this paper as [16]
Common task success metrics for LLM-based agents include success rate, reward/score, coverage, and accuracy.
“Common metrics include success rate [12,22,57,59], reward/score [22,59,122], coverage [16], and accuracy [18,40,102].”
From A survey on large language model based autonomous agents (2024) · cites this paper as [16]
Some LLM-based agents can acquire external databases or APIs to obtain general knowledge.
“Some of them can acquire external databases or APIs to obtain general knowledge [99, 93, 159, 161].”
From A Survey on the Memory Mechanism of Large Language Model-based Agents (2025) · cites this paper as [93]
Common efficiency metrics for LLM-based agents include length of planning, cost associated with development, speed of inference, and number of clarification dialogues.
“Commonly considered metrics encompass the length of planning [57], the cost associated with development [18], the speed of inference [16,38], and number of clarification dialogues [122].”
From A survey on large language model based autonomous agents (2024) · cites this paper as [16]
The citation [16,38] is attached to inference speed, not the other metrics in the sentence. Section 4.2 (p. 9) compares learning efficiency in episodes and steps, but does not address inference speed. Searches for inference speed, latency, and runtime found no passage establishing it as a metric. (LLM, conf=0.72)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Code as Policies: Language Model Programs for Embodied Control
Liang, J., Huang, W., Xia, F., Xu, P., Hausman, K., Ichter, B., Florence, P., & Zeng, A. (2023) · 2023 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA) · doi:10.1109/icra48891.2023.10160591 · Cited by 767 · see citing works
PaLM-E: An Embodied Multimodal Language Model
Driess, D., Xia, F., Sajjadi, M. S. M., Lynch, C., Chowdhery, A., Ichter, B., Wahid, A., Tompson, J., Vuong, Q., Yu, T., et al. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2303.03378 · Cited by 591 · see citing works
Language Models as Zero-Shot Planners: Extracting Actionable Knowledge for Embodied Agents
Huang, W., Abbeel, P., Pathak, D., & Mordatch, I. (2022) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2201.07207 · Cited by 304 · see citing works
Mastering Diverse Domains through World Models
Hafner, D., Pasukonis, J., Ba, J., & Lillicrap, T. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2301.04104 · Cited by 124 · cited 7× · see citing works
“For RL-based methods like VPT [2] and DreamerV3 [7], the goal item(diamond) is hard-coded into the model weights, which means there are no easy way to re-task the trained RL agents for collecting other items in the inference stage.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialAPI-Bank: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Tool-Augmented LLMs
Li, M., Zhao, Y., Yu, B., Song, F., Li, H., Yu, H., Li, Z., Huang, F., & Li, Y. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2304.08244 · Cited by 124 · see citing works
MineRL Diamond 2021 Competition: Overview, Results, and Lessons Learned
Kanervisto, A., Milani, S., Ramanauskas, K., Topin, N., Lin, Z., Li, J., Shi, J., Ye, D., Fu, Q., Yang, W., et al. (2022) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2202.10583 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 19
- [1][1] A. Amiranashvili, N. Dorka, W. Burgard, V. Koltun, and T. Brox. Scaling imitation learning in minecraft. arXiv preprint arXiv:2007.02701 , 2020. - · arXiv
- [2][2] B. Baker, I. Akkaya, P. Zhokov, J. Huizinga, J. Tang, A. Ecoffet, B. Houghton, R. Sampedro, and J. Clune. Video pretraining (vpt): Learning to act by watching unlabeled online videos. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , 35:24639-24654, 2022. -
- [3][3] S. Cai, Z. Wang, X. Ma, A. Liu, and Y. Liang. Open-world multi-task control through goal-aware representation learning and adaptive horizon prediction. arXiv preprint arXiv:2301.10034 , 2023. - · arXiv
- [5][5] L. Fan, G. Wang, Y. Jiang, A. Mandlekar, Y. Yang, H. Zhu, A. Tang, D.-A. Huang, Y. Zhu, and A. Anandkumar. Minedojo: Building open-ended embodied agents with internet-scale knowledge. arXiv preprint arXiv:2206.08853 , 2022. - · arXiv
- [6][6] W. H. Guss, S. Milani, N. Topin, B. Houghton, S. Mohanty, A. Melnik, A. Harter, B. Buschmaas, B. Jaster, C. Berganski, et al. Towards robust and domain agnostic reinforcement learning competitions: Minerl 2020. In NeurIPS 2020 Competition and Demonstration Track , pages 233-252. PMLR, 2021. -
- [9][9] W. Huang, F. Xia, T. Xiao, H. Chan, J. Liang, P. Florence, A. Zeng, J. Tompson, I. Mordatch, Y. Chebotar, et al. Inner monologue: Embodied reasoning through planning with language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2207.05608 , 2022. - · arXiv
- [11][11] I. Kanitscheider, J. Huizinga, D. Farhi, W. H. Guss, B. Houghton, R. Sampedro, P. Zhokhov, B. Baker, A. Ecoffet, J. Tang, et al. Multi-task curriculum learning in a complex, visual, hard-exploration domain: Minecraft. arXiv preprint arXiv:2106.14876 , 2021. - · arXiv
- [14][14] Z. Lin, J. Li, J. Shi, D. Ye, Q. Fu, and W. Yang. Juewu-mc: Playing minecraft with sample-efficient hierarchical reinforcement learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2112.04907 , 2021. - · arXiv
- [15][15] H. Mao, C. Wang, X. Hao, Y. Mao, Y. Lu, C. Wu, J. Hao, D. Li, and P. Tang. Seihai: A sample-efficient hierarchical ai for the minerl competition. In Distributed Artificial Intelligence: Third International Conference, DAI 2021, Shanghai, China, December 17-18, 2021, Proceedings 3 , pages 38-51. Springer, 2022. -
- [17][17] S. Milani, N. Topin, B. Houghton, W. H. Guss, S. P. Mohanty, K. Nakata, O. Vinyals, and N. S. Kuno. Retrospective analysis of the 2019 minerl competition on sample efficient reinforcement learning. In NeurIPS 2019 Competition and Demonstration Track , pages 203-214. PMLR, 2020. -
- [18][18] S. Milani, A. Kanervisto, K. Ramanauskas, S. Schulhoff, B. Houghton, S. Mohanty, B. Galbraith, K. Chen, Y. Song, T. Zhou, et al. Towards solving fuzzy tasks with human feedback: A retrospective of the minerl basalt 2022 competition. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.13512 , 2023. - · arXiv
- [19][19] T. Schick, J. Dwivedi-Yu, R. Dessì, R. Raileanu, M. Lomeli, L. Zettlemoyer, N. Cancedda, and T. Scialom. Toolformer: Language models can teach themselves to use tools. arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.04761 , 2023. - · arXiv
- [20][20] Y. Shen, K. Song, X. Tan, D. Li, W. Lu, and Y. Zhuang. Hugginggpt: Solving ai tasks with chatgpt and its friends in huggingface. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.17580 , 2023. - · arXiv
- [21][21] I. Singh, V. Blukis, A. Mousavian, A. Goyal, D. Xu, J. Tremblay, D. Fox, J. Thomason, and A. Garg. Progprompt: Generating situated robot task plans using large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2209.11302 , 2022. - · arXiv
- [23][23] O. E. L. Team, A. Stooke, A. Mahajan, C. Barros, C. Deck, J. Bauer, J. Sygnowski, M. Trebacz, M. Jaderberg, M. Mathieu, et al. Open-ended learning leads to generally capable agents. arXiv preprint arXiv:2107.12808 , 2021. - · arXiv
- [24][24] C. Tessler, S. Givony, T. Zahavy, D. Mankowitz, and S. Mannor. A deep hierarchical approach to lifelong learning in minecraft. In Proceedings of the AAAI conference on artificial intelligence , 2017. -
- [25][25] Z. Wang, S. Cai, A. Liu, X. Ma, and Y. Liang. Describe, explain, plan and select: Interactive planning with large language models enables open-world multi-task agents. arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.01560 , 2023. - · arXiv
- [26][26] J. Wei, X. Wang, D. Schuurmans, M. Bosma, E. Chi, Q. Le, and D. Zhou. Chain of thought prompting elicits reasoning in large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2201.11903 , 2022. - · arXiv
- [28][28] H. Yuan, C. Zhang, H. Wang, F. Xie, P. Cai, H. Dong, and Z. Lu. Plan4mc: Skill reinforcement learning and planning for open-world minecraft tasks. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.16563 , 2023. · arXiv
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A survey on large language model based autonomous agents
Wang, L., Ma, C., Feng, X., Zhang, Z., Yang, H., Zhang, J., Chen, Z., Tang, J., Chen, X., Lin, Y., et al. (2024) · Frontiers of Computer Science · doi:10.1007/s11704-024-40231-1 · Cited by 1,941 · see citing works
Self-citationThe rise and potential of large language model based agents: a survey
Xi, Z., Chen, W., Guo, X., He, W., Ding, Y., Hong, B., Zhang, M., Wang, J., Jin, S., Zhou, E., et al. (2025) · Science China Information Sciences · doi:10.1007/s11432-024-4222-0 · Cited by 970 · see citing works
Self-citationEncouraging Divergent Thinking in Large Language Models through Multi-Agent Debate
Liang, T., He, Z., Jiao, W., Wang, X., Wang, Y., Wang, R., Yang, Y., Shi, S., & Tu, Z. (2024) · Proceedings of the 2024 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing · doi:10.18653/v1/2024.emnlp-main.992 · Cited by 274 · see citing works
Self-citationThe Rise and Potential of Large Language Model Based Agents: A Survey
Xi, Z., Chen, W., Guo, X., He, W., Ding, Y., Hong, B., Zhang, M., Wang, J., Jin, S., Zhou, E., et al. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2309.07864 · Cited by 972 · see citing works
Self-citationA review of large language models and autonomous agents in chemistry
Ramos, M. C., Collison, C. J., & White, A. D. (2025) · Chemical Science · doi:10.1039/d4sc03921a · Cited by 274 · see citing works
A Survey on the Memory Mechanism of Large Language Model-based Agents
Zhang, Z., Dai, Q., Bo, X., Ma, C., Li, R., Chen, X., Zhu, J., Dong, Z., & Wen, J.-R. (2025) · ACM Transactions on Information Systems · doi:10.1145/3748302 · Cited by 118 · see citing works
Self-citationGenerative AI for self-adaptive systems: State of the art and research roadmap
Li, J., Zhang, M., Li, N., Weyns, D., Jin, Z., & Tei, K. (2024) · ACM Transactions on Autonomous and Adaptive Systems · doi:10.1145/3686803 · Cited by 77 · see citing works
Zhang, Z., Yao, Y., Zhang, A., Tang, X., Ma, X., He, Z., Wang, Y., Gerstein, M., Wang, R., Liu, G., et al. (2025) · ACM Computing Surveys · doi:10.1145/3719341 · Cited by 51 · see citing works
Self-citation<b>JARVIS</b> -1: Open-World Multi-Task Agents With Memory-Augmented Multimodal Language Models
Wang, Z., Cai, S., Liu, A., Jin, Y., Hou, J., Zhang, B., Lin, H., He, Z., Zheng, Z., Yang, Y., et al. (2025) · IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1109/tpami.2024.3511593 · Cited by 36 · see citing works
Multi-agent systems powered by large language models: applications in swarm intelligence
Jimenez-Romero, C., Yegenoglu, A., & Blum, C. (2025) · Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.3389/frai.2025.1593017 · Cited by 30 · see citing works
Embodied Agent Interface: Benchmarking LLMs for Embodied Decision Making
Li, M., Zhao, S., Wang, Q., Wang, K., Zhou, Y., Srivastava, S., Gokmen, C., Lee, T., Li, L., Zhang, R., et al. (2024) · Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 37 · doi:10.52202/079017-3188 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
A Survey on the Memory Mechanism of Large Language Model based Agents
Zhang, Z., Bo, X., Ma, C., Li, R., Chen, X., Dai, Q., Zhu, J., Dong, Z., & Wen, J.-R. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2404.13501 · Cited by 149 · see citing works
Self-citationA knowledge-driven framework for Robotic Odor Source Localization using large language models
Mahmud, K. R., Wang, L., Hassan, S., & Zhang, Z. (2025) · Robotics and Autonomous Systems · doi:10.1016/j.robot.2025.104915 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
Self-citationRisks from Language Models for Automated Mental Healthcare: Ethics and Structure for Implementation
Grabb, D., Lamparth, M., & Vasan, N. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2406.11852 · Cited by 39 · see citing works
KARMA: Augmenting Embodied AI Agents with Long-and-Short Term Memory Systems
Wang, Z., Yu, B., Zhao, J., Sun, W., Hou, S., Liang, S., Hu, X., Han, Y., & Gan, Y. (2025) · 2025 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA) · doi:10.1109/icra55743.2025.11128047 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
Dong, Y., Zhu, X., Pan, Z., Zhu, L., & Yang, Y. (2024) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics ACL 2024 · doi:10.18653/v1/2024.findings-acl.964 · Cited by 13 · see citing works
Self-citationLarge Language Models as Biomedical Hypothesis Generators: A Comprehensive Evaluation
Qi, B., Zhang, K., Tian, K., Li, H., Chen, Z.-R., Zeng, S., Hua, E., Jinfang, H., & Zhou, B. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2407.08940 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
“…planning (Shen et al., 2023; Valmeekam et al., 2023), decision-making (Yang et al., 2023a; Kang et al., 2023), and long-term memory capabilities (Zhu et al., 2023a; Hu et al., 2023), and they are constructed upon the foundation of LLMs. LAAs can autonomously plan sub-goals for complex tasks,…”
BackgroundAriGraph: Learning Knowledge Graph World Models with Episodic Memory for LLM Agents
Anokhin, P., Semenov, N., Sorokin, A., Evseev, D., Kravchenko, A., Burtsev, M., & Burnaev, E. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2407.04363 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
“The Cooking game has the highest difficulty, because any error at intermediate step prevents completion of the whole game.”
From Human Memory to AI Memory: A Survey on Memory Mechanisms in the Era of LLMs
Wu, Y., Liang, S., Zhang, C., Wang, Y., Zhang, Y., Guo, H., Tang, R., & Liu, Y. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2504.15965 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
“Ghost in the Minecraft (GITM) [101] uses reference plans recorded in memory, allowing the agent planner to more efficiently handle encountered tasks, thereby improving task execution success rates.”
An Efficient Context-Dependent Memory Framework for LLM-Centric Agents
Gao, P., Zhao, J., Chen, X., & Yilin, L. (2025) · Proceedings of the 2025 Conference of the Nations of the Americas Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (Volume 3: Industry Track) · doi:10.18653/v1/2025.naacl-industry.80 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
“Many other works have applied the reasoning and decision-making capabilities of LLM to various domains, including robotics (Ahn et al., 2022; Liang et al., 2023), gaming (Wang et al., 2024b, 2023; Zhu et al., 2023), and game theory (Zhang et al., 2024; Guo et al., 2023).”
AssistantBench: Can Web Agents Solve Realistic and Time-Consuming Tasks?
Yoran, O., Amouyal, S. J., Malaviya, C., Bogin, B., Press, O., & Berant, J. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2407.15711 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
Deshpande, D., Gangal, V., Mehta, H., Kannappan, A., Qian, R., & Wang, P. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2510.01353
“Memory for agents is an essential component, especially for applications such as LLM personalization [20, 21], social simulation [22, 23], gaming [24, 25, 26, 27].”
Memory for Autonomous LLM Agents:Mechanisms, Evaluation, and Emerging Frontiers
Du, P. (2026) · arXiv · Cited by 1 · see citing works
“Ghost in the Minecraft [Zhu et al., 2023] uses text-based knowledge and memory for generally capable open-world agents.”
A Survey of Agent Memory in the Second Half: Towards Self-Evolving and Long-Horizon Agents
Huang, W.-C., Zhang, W., Liang, Y., Bei, Y., Chen, Y., Feng, T., Pan, X., Tan, Z., Wang, Y., Wei, T., et al. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2602.06052
Self-citationFrom Text to Space: Mapping Abstract Spatial Models in LLMs during a Grid-World Navigation Task
Martorell, N. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2502.16690
A Case for AI Consciousness: Language Agents and Global Workspace Theory
Goldstein, S., & Kirk-Giannini, C. D. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2410.11407 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
Piao, J., Yan, Y., Zhang, J., Li, N., Yan, J., Lan, X., Lu, Z., Zheng, Z., Wang, J. Y., Zhou, D., et al. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2502.08691 · Cited by 43 · see citing works
“Meanwhile, the environment not only serves as the ground for interactions among agents, but also provides critical feedback that guides their behaviors [6, 64, 98, 117].”
Lyfe Agents: Generative agents for low-cost real-time social interactions
Kaiya, Z., Naim, M., Kondic, J., Cortes, M., Ge, J., Luo, S., Yang, G. R., & Ahn, A. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2310.02172 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
- Authors
- Zhu, X., Chen, Y., Tian, H., Tao, C., Su, W., Yang, C., Huang, G., Li, B., Lu, L., Wang, X., Qiao, Y., Zhang, Z., & Dai, J.
- Affiliations
- Sensetime (China) (CN)
- University of Science and Technology of China (CN)
- Tsinghua University (CN)
- Chinese University of Hong Kong (HK)
- Shanghai Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (CN)
- Chinese Academy of Sciences (CN)
- ORCID
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2023
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2305.17144
- OpenAlex
- W4378768661
- Cited by
- 33
- References
- 6
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 2
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- HAL (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Artificial Intelligence in Games
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Reinforcement Learning in Robotics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI-based Problem Solving and Planning
- Keywords
- Minecraft, large language models, open-world environments, action planning, long-horizon tasks, LLM agents
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
