Efficient Test-time Inference for Generative Planning Models with OCL Search

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.

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.

Beyond training-time optimization, scaling test-time computation has emerged as a key paradigm to extend the reasoning capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs). However, most existing methods adopt a rigid Planning-before-Trial (PbT) policy, which inefficiently allocates test-time compute by incurring planning overhead even on directly solvable problems. We propose Planning-after-Trial (PaT), an adaptive policy for code generation that invokes a planner only upon verification failure. This adaptive policy naturally enables a heterogeneous model configuration: a cost-efficient model handles generation attempts, while a powerful model is reserved for targeted planning interventions. Empirically, across multiple benchmarks and model families, our approach significantly advances the cost-performance Pareto frontier. Notably, our heterogeneous configuration achieves performance comparable to a large homogeneous model while reducing inference cost by approximately 69%.