Generalized Planning in PDDL Domains with Pretrained Large Language Models
About
Recent work has considered whether large language models (LLMs) can function as planners: given a task, generate a plan. We investigate whether LLMs can serve as generalized planners: given a domain and training tasks, generate a program that efficiently produces plans for other tasks in the domain. In particular, we consider PDDL domains and use GPT-4 to synthesize Python programs. We also consider (1) Chain-of-Thought (CoT) summarization, where the LLM is prompted to summarize the domain and propose a strategy in words before synthesizing the program; and (2) automated debugging, where the program is validated with respect to the training tasks, and in case of errors, the LLM is re-prompted with four types of feedback. We evaluate this approach in seven PDDL domains and compare it to four ablations and four baselines. Overall, we find that GPT-4 is a surprisingly powerful generalized planner. We also conclude that automated debugging is very important, that CoT summarization has non-uniform impact, that GPT-4 is far superior to GPT-3.5, and that just two training tasks are often sufficient for strong generalization.
Related benchmarks
| Task | Dataset | Result | Rank | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Generalized Planning | 17 PDDL Domains | Average Coverage56 | 15 | |
| Generalized Planning | PDDL trading domain | Solution Rate100 | 10 | |
| Generalized Planning | PDDL trapnewspapers domain | Solution Percentage100 | 10 | |
| Generalized Planning | PDDL | Solution Percentage100 | 10 | |
| Generalized Planning | PDDL manyferry domain | Solution Percentage100 | 10 | |
| Generalized Planning | PDDL manygripper domain | Solution Rate100 | 10 | |
| Generalized Planning | PDDL heavypack | Percent Solved100 | 10 | |
| Generalized Planning | PDDL hiking domain | Solution Rate100 | 10 | |
| Generalized Planning | PDDL manymiconic domain | Solution Rate0.00e+0 | 10 |