Organizations: University of York, UK · Cyprus University of Technology, Cyprus
Abstract
Integrating Large Language Models (LLMs) into complex software systems enables the generation of human-understandable explanations of opaque AI processes, such as automated task planning. However, the quality and reliability of these explanations heavily depend on effective prompt engineering. The lack of a systematic understanding of how diverse stakeholder groups formulate and refine prompts hinders the development of tools that can automate this process. We introduce COMPASS (COgnitive Modelling for Prompt Automated SynthesiS), a proof-of-concept self-adaptive approach that formalises prompt engineering as a cognitive and probabilistic decision-making process. COMPASS models unobservable users' latent cognitive states, such as attention and comprehension, uncertainty, and observable interaction cues as a POMDP, whose synthesised policy enables adaptive generation of explanations and prompt refinements. We evaluate COMPASS using two diverse cyber-physical system case studies to assess the adaptive explanation generation and their qualities, both quantitatively and qualitatively. Our results demonstrate the feasibility of COMPASS integrating human cognition and user profile's feedback into automated prompt synthesis in complex task planning systems.
When automating plan generation for a real-world sequential decision problem, the goal is often not to replace the human planner, but to facilitate an iterative reasoning and elicitation process, where the human's role is to guide the AI planner according to their preferences and expertise. In this context, explanations that respond to users' questions are crucial to improve their understanding of potential solutions and increase their trust in the system. To enable natural interaction with such a system, we present a multi-agent Large Language Model (LLM) architecture that is agnostic to the explanation framework and enables user- and context-dependent interactive explanations. We also describe an instantiation of this framework for goal-conflict explanations, which we use to conduct a user study comparing the LLM-powered interaction with a baseline template-based explanation interface.
In orchestrated multi-agent systems, humans often struggle to manage plans due to their complexity and limited transparency. Existing approaches rely on outcome-level supervision, where users verify only final outputs without visibility into intermediate reasoning. We formalize a design space for human-LLM co-planning interactions along three axes: mode (semantic vs. structural), scope (global vs. targeted), and level (low vs. high-level edits). We realize it in AMBIPOM, a prototype supporting process-level supervision through both semantic and structural interactions. Through a user study, we characterize how users navigate this space, revealing hybrid workflows and effort-control-risk trade-offs; through a controlled benchmark, we analyze how LLMs revise plans under varying scope and revision strategies. Our findings yield design insights for more transparent, controllable, and effective human-AI co-planning. We release code and data at https://github.com/megagonlabs/ambipom.
In modern industry, dynamic environments and the complexity of modular and reconfigurable resources require automated planning of process sequences. Capability-based planning approaches address this by automatically generating plans from semantic knowledge models that describe resource functions in a machine-interpretable form. Their practical use, however, remains limited: solver feedback, especially in the case of unsatisfiability, is difficult to interpret, and the knowledge models require adaptation as operational conditions change or requests become infeasible. This paper presents a hybrid assistance system that augments an existing capability-based Satisfiability Modulo Theories (SMT) planning approach with an Large Language Model (LLM)-based layer for natural-language interaction, explanation, and adaptation. Formal planning correctness remains with the symbolic planner, while the LLM layer handles natural-language access and flexible knowledge model adaptation under explicit Human-in-the-Loop (HitL) approval. The system decomposes into four components: Capability Grounding, Symbolic Planning, Result Interpretation, and Planning Adaptation, realized as a routed agentic workflow in which a central router delegates to five specialized agents. The system is evaluated on a modular production system across four scenario types. Of 23 test cases, 9 of 10 knowledge queries and all 4 satisfiable planning cases were handled correctly, 3 of 4 unsatisfiable cases produced concrete repair proposals, and all 5 adaptive planning scenarios resolved into satisfiable plans through iterative, user-approved knowledge model modifications. The findings confirm that combining formal planning with LLM-based assistance substantially improves accessibility and adaptability in industrial automation.
Luis Miguel Vieira da Silva, Nicolas König, Felix Gehlhoff