The generation of planning domains from natural language descriptions remains an open problem even with the advent of large language models and reasoning models. Recent work suggests that while LLMs have the ability to assist with domain generation, they are still far from producing high quality domains that can be deployed in practice. To this end, we investigate the ability of an agentic language model feedback framework to generate planning domains from natural language descriptions that have been augmented with a minimal amount of symbolic information. In particular, we evaluate the quality of the generated domains under various forms of symbolic feedback, including landmarks, and output from the VAL plan validator. Using these feedback mechanisms, we experiment using heuristic search over model space to optimize domain quality.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: An overview of our model space reasoning as search in feedback space pipeline for planning domain generation from natural language descriptions.
Figure 2: HDE score averaged across all domains for each model and feedback pipeline. Error bars indicade 95% confidence intervals over trials, i.e., 95% of trials scored within the error bars.
Average HDE %
# Perfect @ 20
Domain
N
LR
LS
VR
VS
LVR
LVS
Avg
N
LR
LS
VR
VS
LVR
LVS
deepseek-chat
blocks
59±5
54±5
66±5
52±4
51±5
59±5
59±4
57±5
1
1
2
0
1
0
0
bloxorz
31±7
42±9
41±9
28±7
39±8
33±7
36±8
36±8
1
3
3
0
2
1
1
checkers
1±1
14±5
8±4
15±5
5±3
15±5
3±3
9±4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
flow
33±8
40±10
55±9
43±7
42±8
29±8
37±9
40±8
1
4
4
1
1
1
3
hiking
68±5
71±5
73±5
79±6
85±4
70±5
76±5
75±5
4
4
7
9
8
5
6
Table 1: HDE results in percentages across all domains and models, averaged over twenty trials varying model seed and description class, reported with standard error on the mean. # perfect 20 is the number of perfect HDE scores of our 20 trials, i.e the count of HDE scores = 100%. The “Aggregate” row is an average for Average HDE columns and Sum for # perfect 20 Columns. Columns from left to right: Model name; Domain name; N: No feedback; LR: Landmark feedback with random single feedback; LS: Landmark feedback with search; VR: Plan validation feedback with random single feedback; VS: Plan validation feedback with search; LVR: Landmark and plan validation feedback with random single feedback; LVS: Landmark and plan validation feedback with search; Average: HDE averages across all feedback types and the total number of perfects for that domain across all feedback types. Bold values indicate the best average performing feedback type for each domain and model combination.
Appendix figures & tables1 asset
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Domain
∣A∣
∣F∣
∣T∣
A arity
F arity
Del.
<
>
<
>
blocks
4
5
1
1
2
0
2
yes
bloxorz ∗
3
4
3
5
7
2
3
yes
checkers ∗
4
6
2
3
5
1
2
yes
flow
3
8
2
2
3
0
2
yes
hiking
2
6
1
2
2
1
2
yes
Appendix
Table 2: List of domains with some basic properties. Columns from left to right: domain name; number of lifted actions and lifted predicates; number of types; the min. and max. arity of the actions; the min. and max. arity of the predicates; and whether a literal can be a delete effect. A ⋅∗ in the name indicates that the domain is novel , not present in the training data of any of the LLMs experimented on.
Frontier large language models (LLMs) can generate heuristic functions that guide search to achieve state-of-the-art performance in satisficing planning, where any plan is acceptable. However, these heuristics are not guaranteed to be admissible and can lead to suboptimal plans. We introduce LeanPlan, the first planning system that finds optimal plans with LLM-generated heuristics whose admissibility is machine-checked. Given a domain description and training tasks, an agentic loop uses planner feedback to iteratively improve a reusable domain-specific heuristic, its admissibility proof and the required domain assumptions. LeanPlan implements the heuristic, its proof and an efficient planner with machine-checked grounding and search in Lean 4. We evaluate LeanPlan on ten domains from the International Planning Competition and three new domains, using test tasks with up to 57 times as many objects as the training tasks. With GPT-5.6 Sol in the agentic loop, we successfully generate heuristics and admissibility proofs for all these domains. With the resulting heuristics, LeanPlan usually expands fewer states than the state-of-the-art Scorpion planner and solves more tasks overall.
André G. Pereira, Augusto B. Corrêa, Felipe Meneguzzi +1
Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul Brazil · University of Oxford United Kingdom · University of Aberdeen United Kingdom +1
Generative models trained on synthetic plan data are a promising approach to generalized planning. Recent work has focused on finding any valid plan, rather than a high-quality solution. We address the challenge of producing high-quality plans, a computationally hard problem, in sub-exponential time. First, we demonstrate that, given optimal data, a decoder-only transformer can generate high-quality plans for unseen problem instances. Second, we show how to self-improve an initial model trained on sub-optimal data. Each round of self-improvement combines multiple model calls with graph search to generate improved plans, used for model fine-tuning. An experimental study on four domains: Blocksworld, Logistics, Labyrinth, and Sokoban, shows on average a 30% reduction in plan length over the source symbolic planner, with over 80% of plans being optimal, where the optimum is known. Plan quality is further improved by inference-time search. The model's latency scales sub-exponentially in contrast to the satisficing and optimal symbolic planners to which we compare. Together, these results suggest that self-improvement with generative models offers a scalable approach for high-quality plan generation.
Robert Gieselmann, Henrike von Huelsen, Mihai Samson +9
Heuristics are a central component of deterministic planning, particularly in domain-independent settings where general applicability is prioritized over task-specific tuning. This work revisits that paradigm in light of recent advances in large language models (LLMs), which enable the automatic synthesis of heuristics directly from problem definitions -- bypassing the need for handcrafted domain knowledge. We present a method that employs LLMs to generate problem-specific heuristic functions from planning tasks specified through successor generators, goal tests, and initial states written in a general-purpose programming language. These heuristics are compiled and integrated into standard heuristic search algorithms, such as greedy best-first search. Our approach achieves competitive, and in many cases state-of-the-art, performance across a broad range of established planning benchmarks. Moreover, it enables the solution of problems that are difficult to express in traditional formalisms, including those with complex numeric constraints or custom transition dynamics. We provide an extensive empirical evaluation that characterizes the strengths and limitations of the approach across diverse planning settings, demonstrating its effectiveness.
Alexander Tuisov, Yonatan Vernik, Alexander Shleyfman
Independent Researcher · Computer Science Department, Bar-Ilan University