Large language models (LLMs) have recently demonstrated great success in generating and understanding natural language. While they have also shown potential beyond the domain of natural language, it remains an open question as to what extent and in which way these LLMs can plan.

Intrigued by the claims of emergent reasoning capabilities in LLMs trained on general web corpora, in this paper, we set out to investigate their planning capabilities. We aim to evaluate (1) the effectiveness of LLMs in generating plans autonomously in commonsense planning tasks and (2) the potential of LLMs as a source of heuristic guidance for other agents (AI planners) in their planning tasks. We conduct a systematic study by generating a suite of instances on domains similar to the ones employed in the International Planning Competition and evaluate LLMs in two distinct modes: autonomous and heuristic. Our findings reveal that LLMs' ability to generate executable plans autonomously is rather limited, with the best model (GPT-4) having an average success rate of ~12% across the domains.

Yet, most rely on anecdotes, overlook contamination of training sets, or lack systematic Evaluation involving multiple tasks, control conditions, multiple iterations, and statistical robustness tests. Here we make two major contributions. First, we propose CogEval, a cognitive science-inspired protocol for the systematic evaluation of cognitive capacities in LLMs. The CogEval protocol can be followed for the evaluation of various abilities. Second, here we follow CogEval to systematically evaluate cognitive maps and planning ability across eight LLMs (OpenAI GPT-4, GPT-3.5-turbo-175B,

Large language models (LLMs) have recently demonstrated great success in generating and understanding natural language. While they have also shown potential beyond the domain of natural language, it remains an open question as to what extent and in which way these LLMs can plan. We investigate their planning capabilities by proposing \texttt{GameTraversalBenchmark (GTB)}, a benchmark consisting of diverse 2D grid-based game maps. An LLM succeeds if it can traverse through given objectives, with a minimum number of steps and a minimum number of generation errors. We evaluate a number of LLMs on \texttt{GTB} and found that GPT-4-Turbo achieved the highest score of 44.97\% on \texttt{GTB\_Score} (GTBS), a composite score that combines the three above criteria.

While Large Language Model-based agents have demonstrated substantial progress in task completion, existing evaluation benchmarks tend to overemphasize single-task performance, with insufficient attention given to the crucial aspects of multitask planning and execution efficiency required in real-world scenarios. To bridge this gap, we present Recipe2Plan, a novel benchmark framework based on real-world cooking scenarios. Unlike conventional benchmarks, Recipe2Plan challenges agents to optimize cooking time through parallel task execution while respecting temporal constraints i.e. specific actions need to be performed within a particular time intervals following the preceding steps. Overly aggressive local parallelization may disrupt this constraint, potentially compromising the entire cooking process. This strict time constraint between actions raises a unique challenge for agents to balance between maximizing concurrent operations and adhering to critical timing constraints. Extensive experiments with state-of-the-art models reveal challenges in maintaining this balance between efficiency and feasibility. The results highlight the need for improved temporal awareness and global multitasking capabilities in large language models. We open-source our benchmark and code at https://github.com/WilliamZR/Recipe2Plan.

Intrigued by the claims of emergent reasoning capabilities in LLMs trained on general web corpora, in this paper, we set out to investigate their planning capabilities. We aim to evaluate (1) the effectiveness of LLMs in generating plans autonomously in commonsense planning tasks and (2) the potential of LLMs as a source of heuristic guidance for other agents (AI planners) in their planning tasks. We conduct a systematic study by generating a suite of instances on domains similar to the ones employed in the International Planning Competition and evaluate LLMs in two distinct modes: autonomous and heuristic. Our findings reveal that LLMs' ability to generate executable plans autonomously is rather limited, with the best model (GPT-4) having an average success rate of 12% across the domains. In the heuristic mode, we demonstrate that LLM-generated plans can improve the search process for underlying sound planners and additionally show that external verifiers can help provide feedback on the generated plans and back-prompt the LLM for better plan generation.

Yet, most rely on anecdotes, overlook contamination of training sets, or lack systematic Evaluation involving multiple tasks, control conditions, multiple iterations, and statistical robustness tests. Here we make two major contributions. First, we propose CogEval, a cognitive science-inspired protocol for the systematic evaluation of cognitive capacities in LLMs. The CogEval protocol can be followed for the evaluation of various abilities. Second, here we follow CogEval to systematically evaluate cognitive maps and planning ability across eight LLMs (OpenAI GPT-4, GPT-3.5-turbo-175B,

Low-Rank Adaptation (LoRA) layers have emerged as a promising approach for efficient model fine-tuning, but their capabilities and limitations have not been fully explored. This paper: 1) Investigates the fundamental question of whether LoRA layers are effective at increasing reasoning + planning abilities 2) We introduce HashChain Reasoning, a novel evaluation dataset that deterministically tests reasoning capabilities. Through systematic ablation studies on GPT-2, we demonstrate that reasoning capabilities appear to exist primarily in low-rank spaces and can be effectively enhanced using LoRA layers. The effective rank analysis of trained LoRA matrices reveals a 2-3x lower rank requirement for reasoning tasks compared to planning tasks, giving context on where LoRA layers would be effective. This also provides evidence for reasoning fundamentally preferring low-parameter spaces for generalization.

Large language models (LLMs) have recently demonstrated great success in generating and understanding natural language. While they have also shown potential beyond the domain of natural language, it remains an open question as to what extent and in which way these LLMs can plan. We investigate their planning capabilities by proposing GameTraversalBenchmark (GTB), a benchmark consisting of diverse 2D grid-based game maps. An LLM succeeds if it can traverse through given objectives, with a minimum number of steps and a minimum number of generation errors. We evaluate a number of LLMs on GTB and found that GPT-4-Turbo achieved the highest score of 44.97% on GTB\_Score (GTBS), a composite score that combines the three above criteria. Furthermore, we preliminarily test large reasoning models, namely o1, which scores $67.84\%$ on GTBS, indicating that the benchmark remains challenging for current models. Code, data, and documentation are available at https://github.com/umair-nasir14/Game-Traversal-Benchmark.