ACPBench: Reasoning about Action, Change, and Planning

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2410.05669v2
• Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2024 17:16:17 GMT
• Title: ACPBench: Reasoning about Action, Change, and Planning
• Authors: Harsha Kokel, Michael Katz, Kavitha Srinivas, Shirin Sohrabi,
• Abstract summary: ACPBench is a benchmark for evaluating the reasoning tasks in the field of planning. The collection is constructed from planning domains described in a formal language.
• Score: 22.47015814897628
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: There is an increasing body of work using Large Language Models (LLMs) as agents for orchestrating workflows and making decisions in domains that require planning and multi-step reasoning. As a result, it is imperative to evaluate LLMs on core skills required for planning. In this work, we present ACPBench, a benchmark for evaluating the reasoning tasks in the field of planning. The benchmark consists of 7 reasoning tasks over 13 planning domains. The collection is constructed from planning domains described in a formal language. This allows us to synthesize problems with provably correct solutions across many tasks and domains. Further, it allows us the luxury of scale without additional human effort, i.e., many additional problems can be created automatically. Our extensive evaluation of 22 LLMs and OpenAI o1 reasoning models highlights the significant gap in the reasoning capability of the LLMs. Our findings with OpenAI o1, a multi-turn reasoning model, reveal significant gains in performance on multiple-choice questions, yet surprisingly, no notable progress is made on boolean questions. The ACPBench collection is available at https://ibm.github.io/ACPBench.

Related papers

• ACPBench Hard: Unrestrained Reasoning about Action, Change, and Planning [22.47015814897628]
  The ACPBench dataset provides atomic reasoning tasks required for efficient planning. The dataset is aimed at distilling the complex plan generation task into separate atomic reasoning tasks. We introduce ACPBench Hard, a generative version of ACPBench, with open-ended questions which the model needs to answer.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-31T17:58:25Z)
• Classical Planning with LLM-Generated Heuristics: Challenging the State of the Art with Python Code [8.971234046933349]
  Large language models (LLMs) fail to plan reliably, even when prompted with a detailed definition of a planning task. We show how to use LLMs to generate correct plans, even for out-of-distribution tasks of increasing size.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-24T15:50:20Z)
• LLM-Generated Heuristics for AI Planning: Do We Even Need Domain-Independence Anymore? [87.71321254733384]
  Large language models (LLMs) can generate planning approaches tailored to specific planning problems. LLMs can achieve state-of-the-art performance on some standard IPC domains. We discuss whether these results signify a paradigm shift and how they can complement existing planning approaches.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-30T22:21:12Z)
• Planning Anything with Rigor: General-Purpose Zero-Shot Planning with LLM-based Formalized Programming [13.246017517159043]
  Large language models (LLMs) have recently demonstrated strong potential in solving planning problems. We propose LLpreview, a framework that leverages LLMs to capture key information from planning problems and formally formulate and solve them as optimization problems from scratch. We apply LLpreview to 9 planning problems, ranging from multi-constraint decision making to multi-step planning problems, and demonstrate that LL achieves on average 83.7% and 86.8% optimal rate across 9 tasks for GPTo and Claude 3.5 Sonnet.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-15T23:20:54Z)
• On The Planning Abilities of OpenAI's o1 Models: Feasibility, Optimality, and Generalizability [59.72892401927283]
  We evaluate the planning capabilities of OpenAI's o1 models across a variety of benchmark tasks. Our results reveal that o1-preview outperforms GPT-4 in adhering to task constraints.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-30T03:58:43Z)
• Unlocking Reasoning Potential in Large Langauge Models by Scaling Code-form Planning [94.76546523689113]
  We introduce CodePlan, a framework that generates and follows textcode-form plans -- pseudocode that outlines high-level, structured reasoning processes. CodePlan effectively captures the rich semantics and control flows inherent to sophisticated reasoning tasks. It achieves a 25.1% relative improvement compared with directly generating responses.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-19T04:13:58Z)
• Plan of Thoughts: Heuristic-Guided Problem Solving with Large Language Models [0.0]
  We formalize a planning-based approach to perform multi-step problem solving with language models. We demonstrate a superior success rate of 89.4% on the Game of 24 task as compared to existing approaches.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-29T18:51:17Z)
• InfiMM-Eval: Complex Open-Ended Reasoning Evaluation For Multi-Modal Large Language Models [50.03163753638256]
  Multi-modal Large Language Models (MLLMs) are increasingly prominent in the field of artificial intelligence. Our benchmark comprises three key reasoning categories: deductive, abductive, and analogical reasoning. We evaluate a selection of representative MLLMs using this rigorously developed open-ended multi-step elaborate reasoning benchmark.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-20T07:06:31Z)
• Improving Planning with Large Language Models: A Modular Agentic Architecture [7.63815864256878]
  Large language models (LLMs) often struggle with tasks that require multi-step reasoning or goal-directed planning. We propose an agentic architecture, the Modular Agentic Planner (MAP), in which planning is accomplished via the recurrent interaction of specialized modules. We find that MAP yields significant improvements over both standard LLM methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-30T00:10:14Z)
• SatLM: Satisfiability-Aided Language Models Using Declarative Prompting [68.40726892904286]
  We propose a new satisfiability-aided language modeling (SatLM) approach for improving the reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs) We use an LLM to generate a declarative task specification rather than an imperative program and leverage an off-the-shelf automated theorem prover to derive the final answer. We evaluate SATLM on 8 different datasets and show that it consistently outperforms program-aided LMs in the imperative paradigm.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-16T17:55:51Z)
• Faithful Question Answering with Monte-Carlo Planning [78.02429369951363]
  We propose FAME (FAithful question answering with MontE-carlo planning) to answer questions based on faithful reasoning steps. We formulate the task as a discrete decision-making problem and solve it through the interaction of a reasoning environment and a controller. FAME achieves state-of-the-art performance on the standard benchmark.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-04T05:21:36Z)
• Plan, Eliminate, and Track -- Language Models are Good Teachers for Embodied Agents [99.17668730578586]
  Pre-trained large language models (LLMs) capture procedural knowledge about the world. Plan, Eliminate, and Track (PET) framework translates a task description into a list of high-level sub-tasks. PET framework leads to a significant 15% improvement over SOTA for generalization to human goal specifications.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-03T20:11:22Z)
• PlanBench: An Extensible Benchmark for Evaluating Large Language Models on Planning and Reasoning about Change [34.93870615625937]
  PlanBench is a benchmark suite based on the kinds of domains used in the automated planning community. PlanBench provides sufficient diversity in both the task domains and the specific planning capabilities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-21T16:15:27Z)
• Selection-Inference: Exploiting Large Language Models for Interpretable Logical Reasoning [14.663216851932646]
  We show that language models tend to perform fairly well at single step inference tasks, but struggle to chain together multiple reasoning steps to solve more complex problems. We propose a Selection-Inference (SI) framework that exploits pre-trained LLMs as general processing modules. We show that a 7B parameter LLM used within the SI framework in a 5-shot generalisation setting, with no fine-tuning, yields a performance improvement of over 100%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-19T17:25:28Z)

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.