Language models are robotic planners: reframing plans as goal refinement graphs
0
Sign in to get full access
Overview
- Language models can be viewed as robotic planners that refine goals to achieve desired outputs
- The paper introduces a framework for reframing language model plans as goal refinement graphs
- This perspective sheds light on the capabilities and limitations of language models for planning and task-solving
Plain English Explanation
Language models, the powerful AI systems that can generate human-like text, can also be thought of as robotic planners. These models don't just produce random text - they work towards achieving specific goals or objectives. The paper proposes a way to view these language models as goal refinement graphs.
In this framework, the language model starts with a high-level goal, like "write a summary of a research paper." It then refines that goal into more specific sub-goals, like "identify the key points," "explain them in plain language," and "organize the summary." The model continues breaking down the goals until it can generate the final text that achieves the original objective.
This perspective helps us better understand the capabilities and limitations of language models when it comes to planning and problem-solving. While they can't create fully autonomous plans from scratch, they can assist with task planning by refining goals and breaking down complex problems. The paper suggests ways this goal refinement framework could be applied to improve language model performance in areas like task planning and natural language interactions.
Technical Explanation
The paper introduces a new framework for reframing the behavior of language models as goal refinement graphs. In this view, language models don't just generate text, but actively work towards achieving specific goals or objectives.
The authors propose that language models start with a high-level goal, like "write a research paper summary," and then iteratively refine that goal into more specific sub-goals. For example, the model might break down the initial goal into sub-goals like "identify key points," "explain them in plain language," and "organize the summary."
This goal refinement process continues, with the model further decomposing each sub-goal until it can generate the final text that achieves the original objective. The authors demonstrate how this framework can be used to analyze the capabilities and limitations of language models for planning and problem-solving tasks.
While language models may not be able to create fully autonomous plans from scratch, the goal refinement perspective shows how they can assist with task planning by breaking down complex problems and refining goals. The paper discusses potential applications of this approach, including improved task planning and more natural language interactions.
Critical Analysis
The paper makes a compelling case for reframing language models as goal refinement systems rather than just text generators. This perspective provides valuable insights into the capabilities and limitations of these models for planning and problem-solving tasks.
One potential limitation of the goal refinement framework is that it may not fully capture the complex, non-linear nature of language model reasoning. While the authors demonstrate how the framework can be applied, there may be scenarios where language models engage in more nuanced or unexpected reasoning that is not easily captured by a simple goal refinement process.
Additionally, the paper does not address potential ethical concerns that may arise from using language models for planning and decision-making tasks. As these models become more capable, it will be important to consider the implications and potential misuse of this technology, particularly in high-stakes domains.
Overall, the paper offers a thought-provoking new way of understanding language models and their potential applications. However, further research is needed to fully explore the practical implications and limitations of this goal refinement framework.
Conclusion
This paper presents a novel perspective on language models, reframing them as robotic planners that refine goals to achieve desired outputs. By viewing language models through the lens of goal refinement graphs, the authors shed light on the capabilities and limitations of these systems for planning and task-solving.
The goal refinement framework suggests that while language models may not be able to create fully autonomous plans from scratch, they can assist with planning and problem-solving by breaking down complex objectives into more manageable sub-goals. This approach could have useful applications in areas like task planning, natural language interactions, and robot task planning.
However, the paper also highlights the need for further research to fully understand the nuances and ethical implications of using language models for planning and decision-making tasks. As these models continue to advance, it will be crucial to consider their broader societal impact and ensure they are developed and deployed responsibly.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
0
Language models are robotic planners: reframing plans as goal refinement graphs
Ateeq Sharfuddin, Travis Breaux
Successful application of large language models (LLMs) to robotic planning and execution may pave the way to automate numerous real-world tasks. Promising recent research has been conducted showing that the knowledge contained in LLMs can be utilized in making goal-driven decisions that are enactable in interactive, embodied environments. Nonetheless, there is a considerable drop in correctness of programs generated by LLMs. We apply goal modeling techniques from software engineering to large language models generating robotic plans. Specifically, the LLM is prompted to generate a step refinement graph for a task. The executability and correctness of the program converted from this refinement graph is then evaluated. The approach results in programs that are more correct as judged by humans in comparison to previous work.
Read more7/23/2024
š¬
0
LASP: Surveying the State-of-the-Art in Large Language Model-Assisted AI Planning
Haoming Li, Zhaoliang Chen, Jonathan Zhang, Fei Liu
Effective planning is essential for the success of any task, from organizing a vacation to routing autonomous vehicles and developing corporate strategies. It involves setting goals, formulating plans, and allocating resources to achieve them. LLMs are particularly well-suited for automated planning due to their strong capabilities in commonsense reasoning. They can deduce a sequence of actions needed to achieve a goal from a given state and identify an effective course of action. However, it is frequently observed that plans generated through direct prompting often fail upon execution. Our survey aims to highlight the existing challenges in planning with language models, focusing on key areas such as embodied environments, optimal scheduling, competitive and cooperative games, task decomposition, reasoning, and planning. Through this study, we explore how LLMs transform AI planning and provide unique insights into the future of LM-assisted planning.
Read more9/4/2024
0
LLMs Can't Plan, But Can Help Planning in LLM-Modulo Frameworks
Subbarao Kambhampati, Karthik Valmeekam, Lin Guan, Mudit Verma, Kaya Stechly, Siddhant Bhambri, Lucas Saldyt, Anil Murthy
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.
Read more6/13/2024
0
Large Language Models Enable Automated Formative Feedback in Human-Robot Interaction Tasks
Emily Jensen, Sriram Sankaranarayanan, Bradley Hayes
We claim that LLMs can be paired with formal analysis methods to provide accessible, relevant feedback for HRI tasks. While logic specifications are useful for defining and assessing a task, these representations are not easily interpreted by non-experts. Luckily, LLMs are adept at generating easy-to-understand text that explains difficult concepts. By integrating task assessment outcomes and other contextual information into an LLM prompt, we can effectively synthesize a useful set of recommendations for the learner to improve their performance.
Read more5/28/2024