A Neurosymbolic Approach for Constructing Planning Domain Models from Clinical Narratives

While Large Language Models (LLMs) provide semantic flexibility for robotic task planning, their susceptibility to hallucination and logical inconsistency limits their reliability in long-horizon domains. To bridge the gap between unstructured environments and rigorous plan synthesis, we propose DUPLEX, an agentic dual-system neuro-symbolic architecture that strictly confines the LLM to schema-guided information extraction rather than end-to-end planning or code generation. In our framework, a feed-forward Fast System utilizes a lightweight LLM to extract entities, relations etc. from natural language, deterministically mapping them into a Planning Domain Definition Language (PDDL) problem file for a classical symbolic planner. To resolve complex or underspecified scenarios, a Slow System is activated exclusively upon planning failure, leveraging solver diagnostics to drive a high-capacity LLM in iterative reflection and repair. Extensive evaluations across 12 classical and household planning domains demonstrate that DUPLEX significantly outperforms existing end-to-end and hybrid LLM baselines in both success rate and reliability. These results confirm that The key is not to make the LLM plan better, but to restrict the LLM to the part it is good at - structured semantic grounding - and leave logical plan synthesis to a symbolic planner.

Large language models (LLMs) struggle with classical planning, but benchmarks rarely distinguish structural difficulty from the difficulty of interpreting symbolic vocabulary. We examine seven STRIPS domains with BFS-optimal plan lengths. For predicting structural difficulty without solving an instance, the zero-training delete-relaxation heuristic $h_{\mathrm{add}}$ outperforms learned alternatives on held-out domains (mean Spearman $|ρ|=0.931$), including ridge regression ($0.707$), object count ($0.657$), and the episodic retrieval architecture ARC ($0.400$). ARC also fails to outperform a linear model using the same features. To isolate semantic effects, we progressively rename predicates while preserving states, transitions, and optimal plans. Valid LLM planning success drops from $67.5\%$ to $40.0\%$ between $0\%$ and $100\%$ renaming, while refusals remain at $0\%$. An LLM supplied with ARC's conditioning information predicts difficulty in context better than trained ARC (mean $|ρ|=0.826$). Hybrid routing between an LLM and a symbolic planner depends more on calibration to the target LLM's outcomes than on the structural score selected. Thus, established symbolic heuristics already estimate structural difficulty well; improving hybrid planning requires modeling LLM behavior sensitive to predicate semantics rather than developing more structural predictors.

Reliable planning requires converting natural-language instructions into executable symbolic specifications, yet large language models remain brittle without costly PDDL annotations and may exploit solver success in semantically unfaithful ways. We study how to learn faithful natural-language-to-PDDL formalization using only solver feedback, without human-written demonstrations. We propose a solvergrounded multi-role reinforcement learning framework where a single language model acts as an Actor, Judge, and Editor for generation, verification, and repair. The Actor proposes PDDL specifications, the Judge provides a solver-calibrated quality signal, and the Editor performs bounded diagnostic-conditioned refinement. On PlanBench, our method improves average success from 35.5% for LLM+P to 70.8%, achieves 66.3% faithful success, and reduces semantic drift to 6.4%. These results show that organizing solver feedback into generation, verification, and repair roles enables more scalable and faithful annotation-free symbolic planning