Counterfactual Scenarios for Automated Planning

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2508.21521v1
• Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2025 11:16:17 GMT
• Title: Counterfactual Scenarios for Automated Planning
• Authors: Nicola Gigante, Francesco Leofante, Andrea Micheli,
• Abstract summary: Counterfactual Explanations (CEs) are a powerful technique used to explain Machine Learning models.<n>We propose a novel explanation paradigm that is based on counterfactual scenarios.<n>We show that producing counterfactual scenarios is often only as expensive as computing a plan for $P$.
• Score: 12.720308658692892
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Counterfactual Explanations (CEs) are a powerful technique used to explain Machine Learning models by showing how the input to a model should be minimally changed for the model to produce a different output. Similar proposals have been made in the context of Automated Planning, where CEs have been characterised in terms of minimal modifications to an existing plan that would result in the satisfaction of a different goal. While such explanations may help diagnose faults and reason about the characteristics of a plan, they fail to capture higher-level properties of the problem being solved. To address this limitation, we propose a novel explanation paradigm that is based on counterfactual scenarios. In particular, given a planning problem $P$ and an \ltlf formula $\psi$ defining desired properties of a plan, counterfactual scenarios identify minimal modifications to $P$ such that it admits plans that comply with $\psi$. In this paper, we present two qualitative instantiations of counterfactual scenarios based on an explicit quantification over plans that must satisfy $\psi$. We then characterise the computational complexity of generating such counterfactual scenarios when different types of changes are allowed on $P$. We show that producing counterfactual scenarios is often only as expensive as computing a plan for $P$, thus demonstrating the practical viability of our proposal and ultimately providing a framework to construct practical algorithms in this area.

Related papers

• Diverse Planning with Simulators via Linear Temporal Logic [1.684937603700545]
  $textttFBI_textttLTL$ is a diverse planner explicitly designed for simulation-based planning problems.<n>By integrating these-based diversity models directly into the search process, $textttFBI_textttLTL$ ensures the generation of semantically diverse plans.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-20T10:59:09Z)
• PlanGEN: A Multi-Agent Framework for Generating Planning and Reasoning Trajectories for Complex Problem Solving [89.60370366013142]
  We propose PlanGEN, a model-agnostic and easily scalable agent framework with three key components: constraint, verification, and selection agents.<n>Specifically, our approach proposes constraint-guided iterative verification to enhance performance of inference-time algorithms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-22T06:21:56Z)
• Symbolic Numeric Planning with Patterns [1.450144681559089]
  We encode the problem of finding a plan for $Pi$ with bound $n$ as a formula with fewer variables and/or clauses than the state-of-the-art rolled-up and relaxed-relaxed-$exists$ encodings. We show that our planner Patty has remarkably good comparative performances on this year's International Planning Competition.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-15T17:20:25Z)
• Planning as In-Painting: A Diffusion-Based Embodied Task Planning Framework for Environments under Uncertainty [56.30846158280031]
  Task planning for embodied AI has been one of the most challenging problems. We propose a task-agnostic method named 'planning as in-painting' The proposed framework achieves promising performances in various embodied AI tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-02T10:07:17Z)
• DiMSam: Diffusion Models as Samplers for Task and Motion Planning under Partial Observability [58.75803543245372]
  Task and Motion Planning (TAMP) approaches are suited for planning multi-step autonomous robot manipulation. We propose to overcome these limitations by composing diffusion models using a TAMP system. We show how the combination of classical TAMP, generative modeling, and latent embedding enables multi-step constraint-based reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-22T20:40:24Z)
• AdaPlanner: Adaptive Planning from Feedback with Language Models [56.367020818139665]
  Large language models (LLMs) have recently demonstrated the potential in acting as autonomous agents for sequential decision-making tasks. We propose a closed-loop approach, AdaPlanner, which allows the LLM agent to refine its self-generated plan adaptively in response to environmental feedback. To mitigate hallucination, we develop a code-style LLM prompt structure that facilitates plan generation across a variety of tasks, environments, and agent capabilities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-26T05:52:27Z)
• Generating Useful Accident-Prone Driving Scenarios via a Learned Traffic Prior [135.78858513845233]
  STRIVE is a method to automatically generate challenging scenarios that cause a given planner to produce undesirable behavior, like collisions. To maintain scenario plausibility, the key idea is to leverage a learned model of traffic motion in the form of a graph-based conditional VAE. A subsequent optimization is used to find a "solution" to the scenario, ensuring it is useful to improve the given planner.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-12-09T18:03:27Z)
• Contrastive Explanations of Plans Through Model Restrictions [11.259587284318833]
  We frame Explainable AI Planning in the context of the plan negotiation problem. We present the results of a user study that demonstrates that when users ask questions about plans, those questions are contrastive. We use the data from this study to construct a taxonomy of user questions that often arise during plan negotiation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-03-29T12:47:15Z)
• On Exploiting Hitting Sets for Model Reconciliation [53.81101846598925]
  In human-aware planning, a planning agent may need to provide an explanation to a human user on why its plan is optimal. A popular approach to do this is called model reconciliation, where the agent tries to reconcile the differences in its model and the human's model. We present a logic-based framework for model reconciliation that extends beyond the realm of planning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-12-16T21:25:53Z)
• Multi-tier Automated Planning for Adaptive Behavior (Extended Version) [0.4129225533930965]
  We propose a multi-tier framework for planning that allows the specification of different sets of assumptions. We show how to solve problem instances by a succinct compilation to a form of non-deterministic planning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-02-27T21:16:01Z)
• STRIPS Action Discovery [67.73368413278631]
  Recent approaches have shown the success of classical planning at synthesizing action models even when all intermediate states are missing. We propose a new algorithm to unsupervisedly synthesize STRIPS action models with a classical planner when action signatures are unknown.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-01-30T17:08:39Z)

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.