arXiv (All)
open access
Localizing and Correcting Errors for LLM-based Planners
Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated strong reasoning capabilities on math and coding, but frequently fail on symbolic classical planning tasks. Our studies, as well as prior work, show that LLM-generated plans routinely violate domain constraints given in their instructions (e.g., walking
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- Beyond Surface Forms: Symbolic Edits as a Test for Logical Reasoning with LLMs#799472
- Beyond Surface Forms: Symbolic Edits as a Test for Logical Reasoning with LLMs#798049
- PlanarBench: Evaluating LLM Spatial Reasoning via Planar Graph Drawing#820492
- Not Too Hard, Not Too Easy: Learning from Intermediate States for LLM Structured Reasoning#1117861
- Stop Before You Fail: Operational Capability Boundaries for Mitigating Unproductive Reasoning in Large Reasoning Models#798647
Record · ID 973054
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive