Translating Natural Language to Planning Goals with Large-Language Models
Authors: Yaqi Xie, Chen Yu, Tongyao Zhu, Jinbin Bai, Ze Gong, Harold Soh
AI-generated Key Points
- Large language models (LLMs) have potential applications in various domains of natural language processing (NLP)
- LLMs struggle with accurate reasoning and planning, limiting their usefulness for robotics-related tasks
- The study investigates whether LLMs can translate goals expressed in natural language into a structured planning language
- Experiments using GPT 3.5 variants reveal that LLMs are better suited for translation than planning
- LLMs can leverage commonsense knowledge and reasoning to fill in missing details from under-specified goals commonly found in natural language
- However, LLMs struggle with generating goals involving numerical or physical reasoning and are sensitive to the prompts used
- Caution should be exercised when using LLMs for real-world applications such as robotics
- Developing more robust NLP models capable of accurate reasoning and planning is important for real-world applications
Abstract: Recent large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable performance on a variety of natural language processing (NLP) tasks, leading to intense excitement about their applicability across various domains. Unfortunately, recent work has also shown that LLMs are unable to perform accurate reasoning nor solve planning problems, which may limit their usefulness for robotics-related tasks. In this work, our central question is whether LLMs are able to translate goals specified in natural language to a structured planning language. If so, LLM can act as a natural interface between the planner and human users; the translated goal can be handed to domain-independent AI planners that are very effective at planning. Our empirical results on GPT 3.5 variants show that LLMs are much better suited towards translation rather than planning. We find that LLMs are able to leverage commonsense knowledge and reasoning to furnish missing details from under-specified goals (as is often the case in natural language). However, our experiments also reveal that LLMs can fail to generate goals in tasks that involve numerical or physical (e.g., spatial) reasoning, and that LLMs are sensitive to the prompts used. As such, these models are promising for translation to structured planning languages, but care should be taken in their use.
Tools for this paper
Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant
You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.
⚠The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the AI assistant only knows about the paper metadata rather than the full article.
The previous summary was created more than a year ago and can be re-run (if necessary) by clicking on the Run button below.
⚠The license of this specific paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the summarizing tools will be run using the paper metadata rather than the full article. However, it still does a good job, and you can also try our tools on papers with more open licenses.
Similar papers summarized with our AI tools
Navigate through even more similar papers through a
tree representationLook for similar papers (in beta version)
We compare the title and abstract with papers indexed in our database. For arXiv papers, we search within the same category; for DOI and other sources, we search across sources and subjects. You can rerun the search as our database grows.
Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.