Transforming and Encoding FTS for SAT Solving: What Helps, What Hurts (Extended Version)

While HTN planning has received significant attention in recent years, support for numerical reasoning remains very limited. In this paper, we investigate numerical Totally-Ordered HTN (TOHTN) planning and show how standard SAT-based encodings can be naturally extended with SMT to handle numeric fluents. In addition, we introduce a benchmark suite for numerical TOHTN planning, providing a first common basis for evaluation in this setting. Experimental results show that this simple encoding already constitutes a competitive baseline. This work opens the way to more expressive approaches to HTN planning.

LLMs can plan by either generating action sequences directly as a Planner or translating tasks into domain specific language for an external solver as a Formalizer. While most real-world tasks are asynchronous with non-uniform durations, concurrency, and execution-time constraints, existing benchmarks hardly cover them. We unify these asynchronous planning challenges under a single formulation and introduce the first three benchmarks that address each at scale. We conclude that the choice of formal representation primarily determines whether planning scales: as dependency graphs grow from 5 to 100 actions, Planner collapses from 96% to 5% plan accuracy and PDDL2.1 Formalizer from 13% to 0%, while CP-SAT Formalizer averages 94% and still achieves 83% at 100 actions. Faithfulness diagnostics show that PDDL2.1's predicate-based planning representation becomes brittle compared to general constraint satisfaction programs, when LLMs must keep predicates, effects, and goals consistent. Execution-time updates of planning constraints further degrade performance sharply (Planner 23.9%, PDDL2.1 0.7%, CP-SAT 46.1%), but a state-aware repair strategy that updates only event-induced constraints recovers CP-SAT Formalizer to 84.5%.

In this paper, we present a procedure for numeric planning based on Symbolic Pattern Planning (SPP). Given a numeric planning problem $Π$, a pattern $\prec$ is a sequence of actions used to define a formula encoding the subsequences of $\prec$ executable from a starting state $S$. Cardellini, Giunchiglia, and Maratea (2024a) follow the Planning as Satisfiability approach by defining, at each step $n \ge 0$, a formula $Π^\prec_n$ in which $(i)$ the pattern $\prec$ is computed only for $n=0$ in the initial state $I$ of $Π$, and then exploited at each step $n$, $(ii)$ the starting state $S$ is set to $I$, and $(iii)$ the set $G$ of goals is required to hold in the last state that can be reached by one of the subsequences of $\prec$ concatenated $n$ times. The procedure begins with $n=0$, terminates as soon as $Π^\prec_n$ is satisfiable, and otherwise proceeds by incrementing $n$. In this paper, possibly at each step, $(i)$ we symbolically search for an intermediate state $P$ reachable from $I$, closer to a goal state, $(ii)$ dynamically recompute the pattern $\prec_h$ -- to be used in the next step -- in $P$, $(iii)$ refine the pattern $\prec_g$ used to reach $P$, and $(iv)$ start the new search from the state $S$ which can be either the initial state $I$ or the last computed intermediate state $P$, exploiting the computed patterns $\prec_g$ and $\prec_h$ to define the pattern $\prec$ to be used in the search. In particular, at each step, we define a formula $Π^{\prec}_{S,P}$ encoding the existence of a state $P'$ closer than $P$ to a goal state, with $P'$ reachable from the starting state $S$ when using the pattern $\prec$. We present different techniques for producing such formulas, each corresponding to a different strategy for exploring the search space. We prove their correctness and completeness, the latter under certain conditions.