Unifying Inference-Time Planning Language Generation
Kagitha, Prabhu Prakash, Sun, Bo, Desai, Ishan, Zhu, Andrew, Huang, Cassie, Li, Manling, Li, Ziyang, Zhang, Li
–arXiv.org Artificial Intelligence
A line of work in planning uses LLM not to generate a plan, but to generate a formal representation in some planning language, which can be input into a symbolic solver to deterministically find a plan. While showing improved trust and promising performance, dozens of recent publications have proposed scattered methods on a variety of benchmarks under different experimental settings. We attempt to unify the inference-time LLM-as-formalizer methodology for classical planning by proposing a unifying framework based on intermediate representations. We thus systematically evaluate more than a dozen pipelines that subsume most existing work, while proposing novel ones that involve syntactically similar but high resource intermediate languages (such as a Python wrapper of PDDL). We provide recipes for planning language generation pipelines, draw a series of conclusions showing the efficacy of their various components, and evidence their robustness against problem complexity.
arXiv.org Artificial Intelligence
Oct-8-2025
- Country:
- Asia > Thailand
- Europe > Austria
- Vienna (0.14)
- North America
- Dominican Republic (0.04)
- Mexico
- Gulf of Mexico (0.04)
- Mexico City > Mexico City (0.04)
- United States
- California > San Francisco County
- San Francisco (0.14)
- New Mexico > Bernalillo County
- Albuquerque (0.04)
- Pennsylvania (0.04)
- California > San Francisco County
- Genre:
- Research Report > New Finding (0.34)
- Technology: