Symmetry-Aware Transformer Training for Automated Planning
About
While transformers excel in many settings, their application in the field of automated planning is limited. Prior work like PlanGPT, a state-of-the-art decoder-only transformer, struggles with extrapolation from easy to hard planning problems. This in turn stems from problem symmetries: planning tasks can be represented with arbitrary variable names that carry no meaning beyond being identifiers. This causes a combinatorial explosion of equivalent representations that pure transformers cannot efficiently learn from. We propose a novel contrastive learning objective to make transformers symmetry-aware and thereby compensate for their lack of inductive bias. Combining this with architectural improvements, we show that transformers can be efficiently trained for either plan-generation or heuristic-prediction. Our results across multiple planning domains demonstrate that our symmetry-aware training effectively and efficiently addresses the limitations of PlanGPT.
Related benchmarks
| Task | Dataset | Result | Rank | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Generalized Planning | Gripper (Extrapolation) | Coverage79 | 17 | |
| Generalized Planning | Gripper (val) | Coverage100 | 17 | |
| Generalized Planning | Gripper (Interpolation) | Coverage100 | 17 | |
| Generalized Planning | VisitAll (val) | Coverage100 | 17 | |
| Generalized Planning | VisitAll (Interpolation) | Coverage100 | 17 | |
| Generalized Planning | VisitAll (Extrapolation) | Coverage64 | 17 | |
| Generalized Planning | Blocks (val) | Coverage100 | 17 | |
| Generalized Planning | Blocks (Interpolation) | Coverage100 | 17 | |
| Generalized Planning | Blocks (Extrapolation) | Coverage13 | 17 | |
| Generalized Planning | Logistics (Interpolation) | Coverage26 | 17 |