LLMs Can't Plan, But Can Help Planning in LLM-Modulo Frameworks

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2402.01817v3
• Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2024 01:13:11 GMT
• Title: LLMs Can't Plan, But Can Help Planning in LLM-Modulo Frameworks
• Authors: Subbarao Kambhampati, Karthik Valmeekam, Lin Guan, Mudit Verma, Kaya Stechly, Siddhant Bhambri, Lucas Saldyt, Anil Murthy,
• Abstract summary: There is considerable confusion about the role of Large Language Models (LLMs) in planning and reasoning tasks. We argue that auto-regressive LLMs cannot, by themselves, do planning or self-verification. We present a vision of bf LLM-Modulo Frameworks that combine the strengths of LLMs with external model-based verifiers.
• Score: 18.068035947969044
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: There is considerable confusion about the role of Large Language Models (LLMs) in planning and reasoning tasks. On one side are over-optimistic claims that LLMs can indeed do these tasks with just the right prompting or self-verification strategies. On the other side are perhaps over-pessimistic claims that all that LLMs are good for in planning/reasoning tasks are as mere translators of the problem specification from one syntactic format to another, and ship the problem off to external symbolic solvers. In this position paper, we take the view that both these extremes are misguided. We argue that auto-regressive LLMs cannot, by themselves, do planning or self-verification (which is after all a form of reasoning), and shed some light on the reasons for misunderstandings in the literature. We will also argue that LLMs should be viewed as universal approximate knowledge sources that have much more meaningful roles to play in planning/reasoning tasks beyond simple front-end/back-end format translators. We present a vision of {\bf LLM-Modulo Frameworks} that combine the strengths of LLMs with external model-based verifiers in a tighter bi-directional interaction regime. We will show how the models driving the external verifiers themselves can be acquired with the help of LLMs. We will also argue that rather than simply pipelining LLMs and symbolic components, this LLM-Modulo Framework provides a better neuro-symbolic approach that offers tighter integration between LLMs and symbolic components, and allows extending the scope of model-based planning/reasoning regimes towards more flexible knowledge, problem and preference specifications.

Related papers

• Logically Consistent Language Models via Neuro-Symbolic Integration [14.317886666902822]
  Large language models (LLMs) are a promising venue for natural language understanding and generation. LLMs are prone to generating non-factual information and to contradicting themselves when prompted to reason about relations between entities of the world. We introduce a loss based on neuro-symbolic reasoning that teaches an LLM to be logically consistent with an external set of facts and rules.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-09T10:52:57Z)
• Q*: Improving Multi-step Reasoning for LLMs with Deliberative Planning [53.6472920229013]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive capability in many natural language tasks. LLMs are prone to produce errors, hallucinations and inconsistent statements when performing multi-step reasoning. We introduce Q*, a framework for guiding LLMs decoding process with deliberative planning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-20T13:08:09Z)
• From Words to Actions: Unveiling the Theoretical Underpinnings of LLM-Driven Autonomous Systems [59.40480894948944]
  Large language model (LLM) empowered agents are able to solve decision-making problems in the physical world. Under this model, the LLM Planner navigates a partially observable Markov decision process (POMDP) by iteratively generating language-based subgoals via prompting. We prove that the pretrained LLM Planner effectively performs Bayesian aggregated imitation learning (BAIL) through in-context learning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-30T09:42:54Z)
• Tokenization Matters! Degrading Large Language Models through Challenging Their Tokenization [12.885866125783618]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) tend to produce inaccurate responses to specific queries. We construct an adversarial dataset, named as $textbfADT (Adrial dataset for Tokenizer)$ to challenge LLMs' tokenization. Our empirical results reveal that our ADT is highly effective on challenging the tokenization of leading LLMs, including GPT-4o, Llama-3, Qwen2.5-max and so on.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-27T11:39:59Z)
• Potential and Limitations of LLMs in Capturing Structured Semantics: A Case Study on SRL [78.80673954827773]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) play a crucial role in capturing structured semantics to enhance language understanding, improve interpretability, and reduce bias. We propose using Semantic Role Labeling (SRL) as a fundamental task to explore LLMs' ability to extract structured semantics. We find interesting potential: LLMs can indeed capture semantic structures, and scaling-up doesn't always mirror potential. We are surprised to discover that significant overlap in the errors is made by both LLMs and untrained humans, accounting for almost 30% of all errors.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-10T11:44:05Z)
• Toward Self-Improvement of LLMs via Imagination, Searching, and Criticizing [56.75702900542643]
  We introduce AlphaLLM for the self-improvements of Large Language Models. It integrates Monte Carlo Tree Search (MCTS) with LLMs to establish a self-improving loop. Our experimental results show that AlphaLLM significantly enhances the performance of LLMs without additional annotations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-18T15:21:34Z)
• Knowledge Fusion of Large Language Models [73.28202188100646]
  This paper introduces the notion of knowledge fusion for large language models (LLMs) We externalize their collective knowledge and unique strengths, thereby elevating the capabilities of the target model beyond those of any individual source LLM. Our findings confirm that the fusion of LLMs can improve the performance of the target model across a range of capabilities such as reasoning, commonsense, and code generation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-19T05:02:46Z)
• Check Your Facts and Try Again: Improving Large Language Models with External Knowledge and Automated Feedback [127.75419038610455]
  Large language models (LLMs) are able to generate human-like, fluent responses for many downstream tasks. This paper proposes a LLM-Augmenter system, which augments a black-box LLM with a set of plug-and-play modules.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-24T18:48:43Z)
• Translating Natural Language to Planning Goals with Large-Language Models [19.738395237639136]
  Recent large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable performance on a variety of natural language processing (NLP) tasks. Our central question is whether LLMs are able to translate goals specified in natural language to a structured planning language. Our empirical results on GPT 3.5 variants show that LLMs are much better suited towards translation rather than planning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-10T09:17:52Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.