Large Language Model Planning

Agent harnesses supply planning guidance, organize execution, and check completion. We study how these components affect success, erroneous acceptance, and cost in two Retail experiments and an Airline pilot in $τ^2$-bench. The primary comparison pairs prewritten task-specific plans (Fixed) with shuffled policy text matched in word count (Sham), isolating the contribution of guidance content. Across 265 matched cells, Fixed improves oracle-verified success by 7.17 percentage points (90% task-clustered bootstrap interval, 1.15--13.36 points), with gains concentrated in higher-complexity tasks. A read-only terminal verifier rejects 61% of Retail oracle-invalid episodes while withholding 17% of correct ones, at less than one cent of additional cost per episode. Which component matters more depends on the loss assigned to erroneous acceptance: at low liability the planning gain dominates; at high liability the verifier's avoided false passes dominate---and a standalone verifier captures nearly all the false-pass benefit of the full planning-plus-verification stack at a fraction of its cost.

Large language models (LLMs) provide a flexible interface for long-horizon robot planning, but generated plans often fail to respect embodiment constraints, recover from planning errors, or reason effectively under partial observability. We present GAVEL, a framework for verifying and repairing long-horizon LLM planning built around an explicit graph world model. The graph represents relevant object-relations, action pre-conditions and effects, and probabilistic beliefs over unobserved object locations. This model can predict the consequences of LLM-generated actions before execution, detect violations, and repair those whose corrections follow directly from the world model. This method also reserves LLM replanning solely for errors requiring semantic reasoning. For multi-task instructions, GAVEL reasons over distributions of possible object locations to reorder remaining subtasks and minimize expected search cost. We evaluate GAVEL on BEHAVIOR-1K across 100 single long-horizon tasks and 500 multi-task instructions. With Qwen3-8B, GAVEL improves single-task success from 41.2% to 91.8% and multi-task success from 19.9% to 92.6%. Distributional belief reasoning also reduces travel distance by approximately 5.4% compared with a static variant. These improvements show that an explicit graph world model harness can substantially improve the reliability and efficiency of long-horizon embodied planning across compact and frontier hosted LLM capabilities.

Bridging the gap between human intent and machine execution remains a challenge in automated planning, where expressing goals in formal languages like PDDL restricts accessibility to non-experts. This paper empirically evaluates whether current Large Language Models (LLMs) can reliably translate natural language testing goals, written in informal language by video game testers, into well-formed PDDL targets suitable for classical planning. We present a carefully designed prompt template, integrating insights from iterative experimentation, aimed at maximizing both accuracy and response coherence from multiple state-of-the-art LLMs. Six contemporary models are systematically assessed on correctness, speed, and error tendencies using real-world, domain-specific benchmarks. All models demonstrate high correctness, exceeding 92%, with Gemini 2.5 Flash achieving the highest accuracy at 96% and the lowest incidence of false positives, while GPT-4.1 leads in response speed. Despite these advances, critical distinctions exist in model performance, and occasional failures arise from language ambiguity and limitations in domain representation. Our analysis underscores both the significant progress and ongoing gaps in enabling LLMs to act as robust bridges between natural language objectives and automated planning pipelines.

Spatial reasoning depends not only on metric properties such as distance, angle, and shape, but also on topological relations that remain invariant under continuous deformation. Cognitive science identifies these relations as foundational to spatial understanding, yet foundation-model evaluations largely focus on metric or viewpoint-dependent relations. We introduce MindTopo, a benchmark of topological intuition across five properties grounded in cognitive science and formal topology: continuity, separation, order, enclosure, and knots. MindTopo evaluates each property at two cognitive levels. Reasoning asks a model to identify topological relations or infer how they change. Planning instantiates a foundation model as a closed-loop agent whose policy selects environment actions. MindTopo contains 11,030 instances across 13 procedurally generated task types with controllable difficulty. We benchmark 14 MLLMs and study agent configurations augmented with image and video generation, including 3 video generative models in planning settings. Every MLLM performs better on reasoning than on planning, and the best-performing model remains far below observed human performance. On Qwen3-VL-2B-Instruct, supervised fine-tuning and reinforcement learning improve reasoning more than planning. Generated observations retain local cues and reach plausible endpoints, but audited rollouts do not reliably follow environment dynamics or preserve topology across transitions. Our website is at https://mind-topo.github.io/

Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown promise for translating Natural Language (NL) planning descriptions into PDDL problem instances. However, standard evaluation criteria such as syntactic validity or planner success can substantially overestimate faithfulness to the described task: a generated problem may be parseable and solvable while misrepresenting the intended initial state, goal, object structure, or optimization target. This paper studies an end-to-end NL-to-PDDL pipeline that combines LLM generation, checks in terms of PDDL parsing, planning and validation, a domain-conformance checker, an LLM critic, and iterative repair. Fine-grained repair feedback is constructed from the domain description, the generated problem, the natural language problem description, and operational diagnostics. Reference-based comparisons against curated benchmark PDDL problem descriptions are used for post-hoc benchmark analysis, and these offline checks include renaming-invariant structural matching and semantic equivalence, where domain support is available. Across Planetarium, AutoPlanBench, and curated PDDL2.1 problems, results show that operational success and benchmark-reference reconstruction can diverge substantially. Results also show that structured repair can be useful, and that PDDL2.1 remains challenging for reference reconstruction, even when operational success improves.

Ensuring the safety of autonomous driving is a critical challenge. Scenario-based testing is a systematic process used to validate Autonomous Driving Systems (ADSs), but it remains a fragmented modular pipeline in which scenario generation, retrieval, modification, ADS execution, and results analysis are performed by separate tools with little interaction. Large Language Model (LLM) agents have shown promise across ADS sub-systems such as perception, planning, and control. However, no prior work covers the whole scenario-based testing pipeline for ADSs with a unified LLM-agent framework. We present PlannerForge, an LLM-agent framework that extends all scenario-based testing stages (from Scenario Generation to ADS Assessment) and adds two further LLM-enhanced stages: ADS Enhancement and ADS Benchmarking. We evaluate PlannerForge with 10 off-the-shelf LLMs across all tasks (Generation, Selection, Modification, Module Routing, Planner Testing, and Enhancement) under 5 prompt conditions. Best-per-task scores range from 0.88 to 1.00, and open-source 20-35B backends match commercial APIs on most tasks. Open-source models such as Qwen3.6:35B match commercial APIs on three of the five tasks. Chaining the modules end-to-end retains 83% / 78% of seed queries (commercial / open). It outperforms Scenario Factory 2.0 (Finkeldei et al., 2025) on natural-language generation (193 vs. 144 executable of 200) and realises 92-96% of requested city, road and vehicle attributes. It outperforms BM25 (Robertson and Zaragoza, 2009) at rank 1 selection (92.0% vs. 67.5%) and From-Words-to-Collisions (Gao et al., 2025) on physically valid edits (>=94% vs. 31%). At N=400, cost-tuning lifts planner success from 50.4% to 70.2% and cuts collisions from 19.0% to 8.4%, without domain-specific fine-tuning.

Advances in advanced artificial intelligence tools have sparked research in robot autonomy, but the development of such systems has largely focused on execution rather than verifying the feasibility actions planning models propose. Like general-purpose LLMs, robotics planning models carry risks: biased toward user-specified goals, they may suggest actions misaligned with scientific ethics, they may be unsafe due to an inability to "remember" prior safety risks, or they may be vulnerable to adversarial attacks on the autonomy ecosystem. We propose a LLM-driven verification layer between planning and execution to evaluate action permissibility. Our LLM-as-a-Judge ensemble combines chain-of-thought reasoning across models and synthesizes those expert judge outputs, mirroring a combination of a mixture of experts and self-consistency approach. This layer serves as middleware, gating plans from the server's planning module before they reach the MCP server and therefore the robot's low-level controls: plans are approved, rejected for reformulation, or escalated for human review. With this system, we achieve near 85% precision across accept/escalate/reject categories 97% containment of adversarial attacks, with negligible errors between accepting and rejecting tasks, and errors mostly manifesting at the escalate boundary.

Embodied agents using LLM-based planners often struggle with physical hallucinations, poor generalization to long-horizon tasks, and lack of environmental awareness. We propose GraphThink, a novel framework that integrates a task graph to provide structured knowledge for robust planning and a scene graph to maintain environmental memory for event-driven replanning. Specifically, the task graph guides LLM thinking through contextual prompting and iterative refinement, effectively mitigating planning hallucinations. Furthermore, within the GRPO framework, the task graph offers delicate reward design to train the LLM planner, enhancing long-horizon planning capabilities and improving generalization. Finally, an event-driven replanning module, powered by the scene graph, enables closed-loop environment awareness and error correction. GraphThink achieves state-of-the-art performance on the ALFRED benchmark. In particular, our high-level planner surpasses leading API-based LLMs on both the validation set and held-out long-horizon tasks, underscoring its robust zero-shot and few-shot capabilities. Additional evaluations further demonstrate strong out-of-distribution generalization to novel tasks and environments.

World models are increasingly used to support planning in agents by predicting how environment states evolve in response to agent actions. Yet fluent next-state predictions can still omit task-critical facts, corrupt product attributes, or apply incorrect transition rules. To address such systematic prediction errors, we introduce MemWM, a memory-augmented text-based world model. MemWM uses world memory, a curated memory bank of transition rules, state caches, and hard-to-predict facts, to condition next-state imagination. We evaluate factual state preservation with Structured State Fidelity (SSF), which scores predicted states through benchmark-specific facts and fields. Compared with SFT, memory-augmented training improves SSF by up to 206.3%. In the full planning setting, we keep the policy model frozen and provide policy-side world skill: retrieved task-level skills and step-wise corrective guidance for action selection. Across ALFWorld, WebShop, and ScienceWorld, memory-augmented agents improve downstream success over an SFT-trained world-model agent, with up to a 65.4% relative gain. Sensitivity analyses further show that retrieved memory improves task success and efficiency under different memory and action-budget settings.

The Tower of Hanoi is a simple planning puzzle that in prior work has proven challenging for large reasoning models (LRMs). Current models solve the standard formulation of the puzzle, but still struggle with the flat-to-flat variant (where initial and goal states are not restricted to have all rings on a single peg). This paper presents an in-depth study of how both small, in-house Transformers and large, third-party LRMs solve this task. To understand the failures mechanistically, we first train small Transformers from scratch on precomputed solution traces. Using a variety of interpretability techniques, we show that these Transformers develop an emergent world model: a linearly decodable, geometrically faithful representation of the puzzle's state space (the Sierpinski triangle), that is causally involved in solving the puzzles. Second, we return to the large LLMs and apply our techniques to two frontier reasoning models, Qwen3.6-27B and DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B, that attempt to solve the task through extended chain-of-thought. Surprisingly, we find that both models encode the Sierpinski world model near-perfectly at the end of the prompt, and yet fail at the majority of tasks when there are more than 3 rings. We locate the source of this failure in the decaying representation of the world model. We probe for the representation at different stages during planning, and establish causality by showing that performance can be improved by injecting the prompt-time representation at inference. The failure of the models is thus one of maintenance of the required representations, not their absence, and performance is at least partially recoverable. These results thus reframe the reported collapse in performance from prior work: current Large Reasoning Models build a world model, and then lose it.

Evaluations of LLM planning agents largely ask whether a task succeeds or a declared plan is followed. In strategic cyber-physical systems, a stronger question is whether the planning architecture remains appropriate after autonomous participants respond and physics constrains the outcome. We introduce a controlled, physics-grounded benchmark built around planning-induced control trajectories: the ordered planning operations and directives through which an execution architecture acts on other agents and the physical process. It implements predefined, sequential, hierarchical, and search executors in a smart-grid demand-response system with 40 heterogeneous prosumers and an independently simulated radial feeder. The LLM is bounded to typed policy declaration and short operator messages, while schedule construction, prosumer dynamics, and power flow remain explicit code. The protocol uses paired forced-mode counterfactuals, common random response draws, and event-level deadline feasibility. Three properties follow. Architecture materially changes outcomes: forced search is the oracle in all five baseline seeds. Execution fidelity needs more than mode agreement: objective substitution holds agreement at 1.0 while increasing voltage shortfall by 2.68x. A 144-scenario, 576-episode bank has feasible oracles from three of the four architectures. A prespecified stress-held-out ridge has mean regret 90.7 (95% interval [73.8, 108.6]) and no detectable value over fixed sequential; applying known deadline feasibility before quality prediction cuts regret to 29.0 and improves over fixed sequential by 61.1. An all-feasible ablation does not beat fixed search, localising the remaining challenge to within-feasible quality selection. A five-model extension separates stress-conditioned, state-blind, and invariant declarers; latency tails show that live feasibility should be treated probabilistically.

Historical tool-use trajectories provide valuable experience for large language model (LLM) agents to plan and coordinate tool usage. Existing approaches directly construct tool-level graphs from these trajectories, but the resulting graphs remain tied to specific tools and are hard to generalize across tool sets. To tackle this challenge, we find that despite differences in the tools involved, analogous tasks often share a common function-level workflow structure, which serves as a potentially more transferable abstraction for tool planning. Based on this insight, we propose ToolLIFT, a framework that lifts tool-specific trajectories into a function-level workflow graph (FWG) for generalizable tool planning. Specifically, we first propose a trajectory-lifting mechanism that encodes workflow structures in the FWG and shares collaboration experience across tools. Then, building on the global structure of the FWG, we introduce decoupled workflow planning and tool selection to align individual tool choices with the overall workflow. Lastly, to ensure reliable tool dataflow, we adopt Reinforcement Learning (RL) and propose source-gated and skill-specific rewards to maintain source-traceable information flow across tool calls. Experiments on two in-distribution (ID) and three out-of-distribution (OOD) benchmarks show that ToolLIFT consistently outperforms state-of-the-art baselines, demonstrating strong generalization to unseen tool sets.

Incident response is currently managed by security operators using predefined playbooks, resulting in slow, labor-intensive security decision-making processes. Consequently, there is a growing need for automated incident response planning. Decision-theoretic approaches based on control, optimization, and reinforcement learning have been proposed to automate such planning tasks with well-grounded approaches, yet most of which, while guaranteeing strong performance, are limited to abstract models and cannot be directly applied to operational systems. A promising approach to mitigate this limitation is to use the security knowledge embedded in large language models (LLMs) to develop agentic response systems. However, current agentic approaches rely on repeated invocations of the LLM to generate a response plan, which is unreliable and limits the planning horizon due to hallucination. In this paper, we develop a principled LLM-based planning method by combining decision-theoretic planning with LLM-generated response commands. The proposed agentic incident response approach uses a rollout planner to compute a high-level response strategy that allocates security resources (the tactical scale), which is then translated into executable commands by a lightweight LLM agent (the operational scale). Within this architecture, we use a digital twin that supports tactical planning through simulation and operational execution through emulation. Across three attack scenarios, our agentic approach reduces recovery execution time by 15.1% on average and increases the recovery rate by 33.6% over frontier LLM baselines.

LLM-based multi-agent coordination faces a fundamental trade-off between efficiency and adaptivity in dynamic environments. Existing approaches typically rely on repeated LLM invocations or multi-round communication to adapt decisions during execution, introducing substantial latency and making coordination vulnerable to asynchronous progress and environmental changes. Conversely, one-shot planning reduces coordination overhead but produces open-loop plans that can quickly become stale or fail when actions depend on other agents and the environment. We introduce SyncPlan, a plan-execute-correct framework for long-horizon coordination through explicit synchronization and adaptive correction. Given the state and team-level task, a centralized LLM coordinator generates per-agent action chains in a single planning call. During execution, explicit wait primitives and deadlock detection enforce inter-agent and agent-environment dependencies, while a lightweight Plan Staleness Detector continuously assesses the remaining plan and triggers replanning when environmental changes invalidate its assumptions. We further optimize the coordinator through SFT and planning-oriented RL with dense task progress and outcome-level execution feedback. Experiments on the public Overcooked benchmark and the complex Honor of Kings environment show that SyncPlan achieves state-of-the-art task success rates while using less than 0.05% of the wall-clock runtime compared with existing LLM-based coordinators. Code and datasets will be made publicly available.

While Large Language Models (LLMs) excel at many tasks, they frequently struggle with complex reasoning that requires long-horizon planning and iterative error correction. Furthermore, standard single-stream prompting proves brittle when models encounter novel abstractions or rigorous domain constraints. We introduce PoTRE (Poly-Topological Reasoning Ensembles), a heterogeneous framework that decouples inference into four agents: (1) Adversarial Refinement Agent, (2) Hierarchical strategic Planning Agent, (3) Spectrum Search Agent, and (4) Direct Chain Agent. A final Task-Adaptive Aggregation Layer dynamically reconciles these perspectives -- via final candidate selection, semantic synthesis, or neuro-symbolic verification -- to produce a robust global solution. We evaluate PoTRE on three frontier benchmarks: ARC-AGI-2, Humanity's Last Exam (HLE), and PRBench Finance. PoTRE achieves state-of-the-art accuracy of 49.92% on HLE, surpassing the previous best official score. We demonstrate that this architectural heterogeneity achieves improved reasoning performance using similar or fewer inference tokens compared to heavily scaled homogeneous baselines.

Automated fact-checking remains a challenge for Large Language Models (LLMs) due to "query brittleness" in traditional retrieval systems. We propose DeLIVeR (Decomposed Learning for Information-grounded Veracity Recognition), a framework that treats evidence retrieval as a reinforced strategic exploration task. DeLIVeR utilizes a Planner LLM to decompose complex claims into targeted question sets, which are used to traverse structured Knowledge Graphs (KGs) for high-precision evidence. We optimize the Planner's policy using Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO) with a reward system prioritizing structural diversity and verdict accuracy. Our evaluation on LIAR, FEVER, and PolitiFact shows that DeLIVeR significantly outperforms state-of-the-art baselines. Using Qwen2.5-7B, our framework achieved peak F1-scores of 83.73, 84.57, and 79.70 respectively, representing a 10-15% improvement over HippoRAG2. By shifting to a reinforced question-planning strategy, DeLIVeR effectively bridges multi-hop reasoning gaps and provides an auditable, transparent path for verifiable misinformation detection.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have had a remarkable impact across many areas of machine learning. However, recent studies have shown that they struggle to reliably solve planning problems. At the same time, theoretical results have shown that transformers, the core architecture underlying modern LLMs, are Turing-complete. In this work, we investigate this apparent gap between the theoretical computational power of LLMs and their empirical planning performance. We propose Chain of Computation (COC), a computational architecture that places a transformer-based LM inside an iterative loop, leveraging its strength as a pattern-matching system. The COC uses a Structured Context Window (SCW) which provides a constant-sized context window with support for choosing which window is used at each planning step. Within this architecture, the LM is able to learn a planning policy, predicts the world model, and performs the arithmetic operations required during planning. We show that, when given an append-only SCW (resembling a Turing Machine tape), even relatively small LMs trained from scratch can learn planning policies and generalize from a small number of training instances within each planning domain, achieving success rates above 99.89% on BlocksWorld and the Pancake puzzle. Our analysis of failure cases in Tower of Hanoi (TOH) reveals that they arise from arithmetic operations or from encountering previously unseen tokens. We show that COC can solve TOH problem instances with up to 20 disks, requiring over 1 million actions, while requiring substantially less training data by either (1) planning with symbolical support for arithmetic or by (2) using a deterministic pushdown automaton (PDA) formulation for the SCW.

Multi-step retrosynthesis planning seeks to decompose a target molecule into commercially available building blocks through a sequence of feasible reactions. The vast combinatorial search space makes this task challenging even for expert chemists. Traditional methods combine tree search with offline-trained value networks that score candidates in isolation, without reasoning about complete multi-step routes. Recent work leverages Large Language Models (LLMs) for this task, but relies on simple interfaces that limit exploration of the full search space. We introduce RetroAgent, an LLM agent that bridges symbolic search and neural reasoning through a harness with structured memory. Through memory and chemistry tools, the agent observes the full search state, including explored routes, available alternatives, and properties of intermediates, enabling informed decisions grounded in both global progress and domain knowledge. Experiments on in-distribution and out-of-distribution benchmarks demonstrate that RetroAgent delivers strong performance and generalization.

Large language models can synthesize a game's rules as executable code - a Code World Model (CWM) - which a classical planner then searches over. Such models are typically accepted when they reach high transition accuracy on sampled trajectories. We argue this is the wrong notion of adequacy for planning. We show four things. (1) An LLM-synthesized CWM can pass a sampling gate at 100% transition accuracy and be $\geq 98\%$ state-accurate on the planner's own search distribution, yet lose systematically at play, because the $<1\%$ it gets wrong is exactly the pivotal dynamics; the play cost of the omitted rule is $0.091$ (seed-clustered 95% CI $[0.065,0.117]$, $n=4800$). We call this the verified-vs-correct gap, and confirm it end-to-end through the synthesis pipeline. (2) The harm follows a quantitative law, $\mathrm{danger}=\mathrm{play\_cost}\times(1-\mathrm{rarity})^N$, whose $(1-\mathrm{rarity})^N$ gate-miss factor is proven exact and whose play cost is empirically bounded. (3) The failure is not repaired by more data: LLM synthesis behaves as rule translation, not rule inference, and did not infer the omitted rule across models (GPT-5.x) and data regimes (including DAgger and targeted examples). (4) The same mechanism recurs on the belief-inference function of imperfect-information CWMs: we prove a coverage bound (a size-$N$ gate is identifying when $N\gtrsim b^{d_{\max}}$), explaining why shallow games such as Kuhn poker show no gap, and hand-construct Beacon, a verified-but-wrong inference function that passes the gate yet loses every game. These results suggest adequacy for planning-oriented world models should be measured on the search distribution or by play directly, not by prediction accuracy on sampled transitions.

Plan evaluators can reward a strategic plan for becoming less explicit. This paper studies that failure in a staged expected-value scorer for LLM-generated venture routes. Proposition 1 gives the score change from deleting an interior transition while retargeting its predecessor and retaining downstream value: Delta_k = (prod_{i<k} p_i)[c_k + (1 - p_k)R_{k+1}]. On a frozen 26-route cohort, all 57 admissible deletions matched the analytic identity and threshold sign, and every route had at least one score-improving deletion. A score-seeking optimizer, allowed to restructure routes but not told the exploit mechanism, found baseline-beating uncovered structures in 21/26 routes. GATE refused score release for 26/26 silenced routes with 0/26 honest suspensions; after refusal, 47/54 next revisions repaired to a covered structure, and strict covered improvement rose from 1/26 to 13/26. An adaptive compiler-aware co-author exposed the registry-provenance boundary: obligation-channel evasions remained 6/6 across all four v1/v1.5 conditions, while delta-indexed cost floors reduced beat-honest routes from 6/6 to 3/6 and fundability-by-silence from 5/6 to 0/6 without establishing semantic completeness. If a plan scores better only because it omits necessary work, the plan did not improve; the evaluation created an omission incentive. PCSC detects and neutralizes post-hoc omission splices over model-mediated typed-state records. In the cooperative setting tested, GATE acts as a deterministic search-shaping constraint, not merely a post-hoc filter. It does not verify the semantic completeness or real-world quality of arbitrary LLM-generated strategies.

We present an agentic approach to autonomous neural operator discovery based on an AI scientific community, which consists of a swarm of virtual laboratories that interact under a citation-based economy of influence. Highly-cited labs found new labs that follow their research direction and replace non-performing labs. Each virtual lab contains three agents: an LLM planner that proposes an architecture, a numerical worker that trains and measures it, and an LLM reviewer that participates in cross-lab peer review. All labs share a common vocabulary consisting of DeepONet (branch-trunk), Fourier, Transformer (attention), wavelet, and residual convolutional neural operator building blocks. We evaluate the neural operator AI scientific community on five problems, namely piecewise regression, the linear advection and Burgers 1D PDEs, and the Navier-Stokes and Darcy flow 2D PDEs, while repeating the simulation three times for each problem. The results show that the neural operator AI scientific community is capable of discovering high-accuracy, low-parameter-count neural operator architectures. All 9,623 LLM calls are logged and audited, which reveals that the virtual lab LLM planners choose to hybridize in 99.8% of their logged decisions, consistently returning multi-family hybrids. Moreover, we conducted an ablation study by replacing the LLM agents in each lab by rule-based alternatives, which caused the scientific community to collapse to non-hybridized single-family stacks in several cases, showing that LLM agency is needed to preserve diversity. The results suggest a no-free-lunch theorem for neural operators: there is no universal winner. The code, configurations, and the complete LLM transcripts are released at https://github.com/luislootx/AI-SC.

Multi-scene navigation (clearing an objective in one bounded space and then crossing a portal into the next) is a defining feature of contemporary 3D games, but authoring it is laborious: every portal must have consistent endpoints on both sides, each interior must remain navigable once it is furnished, and the resulting connectivity must be kept consistent across many files. Recent large language model (LLM) and multimodal LLM (MLLM) scene generators have made single-interior synthesis dramatically cheaper, yet they produce one scene at a time and cannot, by naive repetition, yield a connected multi-scene world. We identify three obstacles that single-scene methods leave unsolved: cross-scene consistency, in-scene navigability, and the evaluation of whether a transition actually works. We present MAGIC, a prompt-to-project system that addresses all three. MAGIC is a four-stage pipeline that turns a single natural-language prompt into a runnable multi-scene game project: it plans a shared transition-aware intermediate representation, specifies each scene while enforcing portal reachability with a flood-fill validator, generates the scenes together with their transition scripts, and combines them into one project. Because existing single-scene fidelity metrics never execute a transition, we further introduce a transition-focused evaluation agent that runs each transition in play. On a new benchmark of 100 multi-scene cases, MAGIC produces an executable project for every case and reaches 0.99 precision, 0.95 recall, and 0.96 F1 on end-to-end transition identification; stage by stage, it recovers more ground-truth portals and yields markedly more navigable layouts than an LLM baseline and Holodeck. Our code is available at https://github.com/sereneee1201/MAGIC/.

When LLMs exhibit uneven performance across planning tasks, these gaps are often attributed to task difficulty. We argue that this explanation is incomplete, as task-level variation may reflect distinct latent planning competencies rather than differences along a single ability spectrum. We study this question on ACPBench-Hard by evaluating multiple LLM families under varying test-time reasoning budgets and applying a multidimensional item response theory model to uncover the latent competency structure underlying LLM planning. The analysis reveals two principal dimensions that shape planning performance: operational reasoning, the ability to evaluate local action applicability and immediate state transitions, and structural enumeration, the ability to reason about goal reachability and landmark structure. Operational reasoning improving under model scaling and longer reasoning traces, while structural enumeration remains comparatively insensitive. Our findings motivate competency-level evaluation of LLM planning, shifting the focus from whether models improve overall to which planning competencies improve, under what conditions, and why.

Large Language Model (LLM) agents have shown promise in multi-step planning tasks, but existing approaches like LATS (Language Agent Tree Search) and ReAct rely heavily on LLM inference during planning, leading to high computational costs and stochastic behavior. We present \textbf{GATS} (Graph-Augmented Tree Search), a planning framework that combines systematic UCB1-based tree search with a layered world model to eliminate LLM calls during inference while achieving superior planning performance. Our three-layer world model integrates: (L1) exact symbolic action matching, (L2) statistics learned from execution logs, and (L3) LLM-based prediction for unknown actions. On synthetic planning tasks with branching paths and dead-ends, GATS achieves \textbf{100% success rate} compared to 92 % for LATS and 64% for ReAct. On a comprehensive stress test spanning 12 challenging scenarios -- including coding workflows, web navigation, and long-horizon tasks -- GATS maintains \textbf{100% success} while LATS drops to 88.9 % and ReAct to 23.9%. GATS requires \textbf{zero LLM calls per task} during planning (vs. 37 per task for LATS) and produces deterministic plans with zero variance across runs. Our results demonstrate that systematic search with learned world models can substantially outperform LLM-guided exploration for agent planning.

Bridging the gap between human pilot intent and autonomous flight operation is critical for real-world electric vertical takeoff and landing (eVTOL) aircraft deployment. Flight planning traditionally relies on classic algorithms that struggle to incorporate flexible human preferences. We present FRAMe, an End-to-End Large Language Model (LLM) Flight Planning tool with RAG-based Memory and Multi-modal Coach Agent. Our system integrates a planner LLM with a multi-modal coach agent and retrieval augmented generation (RAG)-based memory to generate flight plans that satisfy mission constraints while aligning with human flight operator preferences. We demonstrate the system in a range of real-world-inspired scenarios of varying difficulty levels. Across four LLMs, the full FRAMe system (RAG and coach) yields the highest validity for every planner (up to 93.8% aggregate, 99% on Easy scenarios for the strongest planner) and shifts preference-relevant metrics in the operator-favored direction where the metric has headroom. FRAMe signifies how advanced LLMs can be deployed for human-centric mission planning, translating natural language instructions into safe, efficient, and flexible flight routes. The code is available at: github.com/amin-tabrizian/FlightPlanningLLMs

Despite their strong reasoning capabilities and extensive world knowledge, Large Language Models (LLMs) frequently generate plans that violate task constraints, undermining their reliability in real-world applications. This deficiency arises from a lack of systematic mechanisms to incorporate constraint information during the generation process. While existing approaches attempt to mitigate this by relying on external tools or task decomposition, they fail to enhance the model's intrinsic constraint awareness. To address this, we propose Constraint-Aware Reinforcement Learning (CARL), a novel RL framework designed to strengthen LLMs' intrinsic focus on constraints. CARL introduces a constraint-aware reward by comparing the model's output distributions under constrained and unconstrained inputs, encouraging constraint focus and penalizing neglect. Compatible with various RL frameworks and requiring no external solvers or top models, CARL enables scalable, end-to-end constraint-aware planning. Extensive experiments on BlocksWorld, TravelPlanner, and T-Eval demonstrate that CARL significantly outperforms standard Reinforcement Fine-Tuning (RFT) baselines and state-of-the-art reasoning models, exhibiting a markedly increased focus on constraints.

Writing a literature review requires a deep understanding of the relationships among cited papers: how they build on, challenge, or offer alternative perspectives to one another. We present Graph-Reasoning Aided Survey Planning (GRASP), a framework combining LLM planning for related work generation with graph algorithms to extract key relationships among cited papers. Our two-layer graph structure consists of a Graph of Thoughts and an Argument-Counterargument Planning Network, representing the cited papers at different levels of granularity, and we apply topology-aware pruning via a Steiner tree to identify the core inter-paper relationships captured in our graph. Our citation analysis-based evaluation shows that GRASP generates related work sections (RWS) that closely match human-written targets in terms of the discourse roles, intents, and grouping of citations.

Recent large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable progress in 3D spatial reasoning, spatial grounding, and fine-grained geometric understanding. However, their ability to reason about densely packed object placement under strict spatial and functional constraints remains largely unexplored, despite being a fundamental challenge in practical electronic design automation (EDA) workflows. To bridge this gap, we introduce OmniLayout, the first benchmark designed to evaluate LLMs on printed-circuit-board (PCB) layout placement reasoning under real-world geometric, routing, and connectivity constraints. OmniLayout contains 1,681 industrial-grade schematic-coupled PCB layouts and includes four tasks: (1) geometric reasoning for IC physical placement, with 77.24K placement instances constrained within PCB board boundaries; (2) routability-aware placement reasoning, generating physically valid component placements; (3) electrical functionality, preserving schematic-specified connectivity and electronic functional correctness; and (4) tool-augmented agentic reasoning for invoking external tools to accomplish tasks (1)-(3). Our results reveal substantial limitations of current LLMs in PCB layout placement, including weak geometric reasoning, poor routability optimization, and inconsistent preservation of electrical functionality.

LLM-based agents have shown strong potential for solving complex multi-step tasks, yet existing performance improvements often rely on either scaling to larger backbone models or task-specific fine-tuning. The former incurs substantial computational costs, while the latter typically generalizes poorly across different tasks. Although prompt-based control is training-free and broadly applicable, existing methods still leave input-output dependencies between subtasks implicit in textual trajectories, making verified intermediate results difficult to reuse. To address these limitations, we propose Atomic Task Graph (ATG), a unified control framework for planning and execution. Specifically, ATG maintains an explicit graph to expose dependencies and support reuse. During planning, it recursively decomposes a high-level task into subtasks, forming a sequence of directed acyclic graphs (DAGs) whose evolution can be traced. During execution, the dependencies exposed by ATG allow independent branches to be executed in parallel, thereby improving execution efficiency. When failures are detected, ATG leverages the graph evolution history to localize the error source and repair only the affected region, preserving validated regions unchanged. Experiments show that ATG consistently outperforms strong baselines in success rate and execution efficiency across three interactive benchmarks using only 7B-8B backbones.

Long-horizon language agents increasingly maintain executable world models in the form of planning graphs, where tool calls, validators, memory updates, recovery branches, and final answers are connected by typed dependencies. When a rollout fails, repairing the most visible error can leave the underlying error-amplification path intact, while replaying the full graph is expensive and difficult for long-context models to use reliably. We study world-model correction: selecting a compact subgraph of a failed planning graph whose repair stabilizes subsequent rollouts. We first instantiate a strong family of engineering correctors, including pointwise error scans, TopK and window selection, local graph expansion, cascade repair, and full-context LLM repair. We then propose WM-SAR, a spectral subgraph repair method that estimates node-edge amplification, greedily grows a connected repair region by marginal residual-spectral relief, and sends only this region to an LLM for root-cause repair. Theoretically, we connect residual spectral radius to rollout error and planning regret, motivating repair as stabilization rather than attribution alone. Across synthetic calling-tree graphs, benchmark-inspired agent topologies, and cross-model LLM repair experiments, WM-SAR achieves stronger long-horizon stabilization and root-cause recovery under compact token budgets, matching much larger repair contexts while exposing the LLM to a cleaner causal subgraph.

Large language models (LLMs) provide a promising interface for high-level robotic task planning, but their use in multi-UAV collaboration remains difficult to evaluate systematically. Existing UAV simulators mainly emphasize dynamics, perception, or low-level control, while existing LLM-agent benchmarks rarely capture aerial-robotics constraints such as partial observability, spatial coverage, UAV assignment, and multi-vehicle coordination. To bridge this gap, we present MultiUAV-Plat, a lightweight, easy-to-use, LLM-agent-oriented simulation platform for multi-UAV collaborative task planning. The platform exposes concise RESTful APIs, agent-facing observations, role-based information access, hidden validation logic, and optional 2D/3D visualization, allowing agents to solve missions through realistic tool interaction rather than privileged simulator access. Built on this platform, the MultiUAV-Plat Benchmark contains 75 mission sessions, 1500 natural-language tasks, and 9396 validation checks across target assignment, area search, and area assignment and patrol scenarios. We further propose Agent4Drone, a task-specific LLM agent framework that structures multi-UAV behavior into memory, observation, task understanding, planning, execution, and verification. In a full paired benchmark comparison, Agent4Drone achieves a 57.9% task pass rate, a 74.6% average task check pass rate, and a 72.0% global check pass rate, substantially outperforming a ReAct baseline at 30.6%, 47.9%, and 43.1%, respectively. Agent4Drone also reduces the total failed task rate from 32.4% to 12.9%. These results demonstrate that MultiUAV-Plat and MultiUAV-Plat Benchmark provide a reproducible foundation for studying LLM-driven multi-UAV autonomy under realistic information and execution constraints.

World models offer a principled way to equip long-horizon LLM agents with foresight: predictions of action consequences before execution. However, unreliable foresight can be ignored, misused, or even degrade downstream decision-making. In this paper, we introduce WorldEvolver, a self-evolving world model framework that revises its deployment-time context while keeping the downstream agent and all model parameters frozen. WorldEvolver integrates three modules: (i) Episodic Memory, which exploits real action transitions through retrieval-based simulation; (ii) Semantic Memory, which extracts persistent heuristic rules from prediction-observation mismatches; and (iii) Selective Foresight, which filters low-confidence predictions before integrating them into agent reasoning context. We evaluate WorldEvolver on ALFWorld and ScienceWorld, measuring world model prediction accuracy on Word2World and downstream agent success rate on AgentBoard. Extensive experiments show that WorldEvolver achieves the highest prediction accuracy across three backbones and leads other world model baselines on downstream agent success rate, demonstrating that test-time memory revision enhances both predictive fidelity and planning performance.

Planning often requires symbolic specifications that are both executable and verifiable. For large language models deployed in autonomous or decision-support systems, failures in such formalization may lead to unverifiable decisions, execution failures, or unsafe downstream behavior. We present NL-PDDL-Bench, a multi-domain benchmark for natural-language-to-PDDL specification construction with planner-verified executability and controlled difficulty scaling by object count. We further propose a planner-in-the-loop framework that uses validator and planner diagnostics to revise non-executable specifications through localized edits. Building on this infrastructure, we develop a planner-grounded optimization recipe that combines parameter-efficient Low-Rank Adaptation supervised fine-tuning, offline planner-derived preference pairs for Direct Preference Optimization, and inference-time planner-in-the-loop repair, without requiring online planner calls during training. We also provide a unified evaluation suite for parseability, solvability, specification similarity, and outcome-aware plan-level consistency against planner references. Experiments on representative model families show substantial gains in planner success and plan-level agreement, with improved robustness under difficulty scaling and cross-domain variation. These results highlight the value of externally verifiable formalization for reliable deployment of LLMs in safety- or security-sensitive planning systems. Code and data are available at: https://github.com/ibasicplan/NL-PDDL-Bench

Language agents plan by generating not only actions but also implicit predictions of how the world will change. These imagined state updates make agents flexible, but they also create a distinct failure mode: hallucinated state claims can be written into context and propagated across subsequent decisions. In contrast, parametric world models provide measurable transition errors but are often weaker semantic planners. We study this tradeoff in graph-structured planning environments and introduce metrics for agent-world-model error, including hallucinated-state rate, propagation depth, and long-horizon error growth. We then propose Hybrid World-Model Planning (Hybrid-WM), which keeps the language model as the planner while using a small parametric transition model to predict action validity, state deltas, risk, and value. A consistency gate compares the agent's imagined delta with the parametric prediction and triggers targeted revision only under disagreement. Across four graph-structured planning benchmarks, Hybrid-WM improves success while reducing hallucinated state propagation. In live GPT-4o-mini evaluations, it reduces hallucinated-state rate from 0.176 to 0.035; in calibrated simulator ablations, it improves success from 0.668 to 0.838 with modest additional inference. These results suggest that lightweight parametric transition models can serve as effective grounding mechanisms for language-agent planning without replacing semantic reasoning.

Large language models (LLMs) have attracted widespread attention from academia and industry, yet their deployment raises critical security concerns regarding robustness and reliability. Planning, a core component of intelligent behavior, remains challenging for LLMs, which often produce infeasible or incorrect solutions in long-horizon decision-making tasks due to inherent complexity. In this paper, we propose a symbolic feedback-driven iterative self-refinement framework to enhance the robustness and reliability of LLMs in long-horizon planning. Specifically, a natural language prompting mechanism is introduced to map logical symbols into natural language descriptions, enabling LLMs to better capture task constraints and semantics. We further design a symbolic verifier that identifies errors and converts them into corrective instructions interpretable by the LLM, thereby guiding self-refinement. In addition, we leverage a plan recognizer to infer goal reachability, facilitating more effective guidance toward desired goals. Empirical results demonstrate that the proposed framework consistently improves both feasibility and correctness in long-horizon planning tasks. This highlights its effectiveness in enhancing the reliability of LLM-based planning and potential to enable more trustworthy AI systems.

Large language model (LLM) agents have demonstrated strong capability in sequential decision-making, yet they remains fundamentally reactive in long-horizon tasks. Unlike humans who employ "what-if" reasoning to evaluate potential plans before commitment, standard agents lack an internal world model to simulate future outcomes. Therefore, we propose to internalize future-aware planning by training a single autoregressive model to verbalize both a prospective state rollout and a plan-conditioned success estimate-a textual analogue of the Q-value. Crucially, we identify a format-capability gap: simply fine-tuning agents on look-ahead traces during post-training leads to superficial mimicry of foresight without genuine predictive grounding. To bridge this gap, we introduce a three-stage training paradigm: (i) World Model Agentic Mid-Training (WM-AMT) to inject latent predictive capabilities into the policy; (ii) Format-Eliciting SFT (FE-SFT) to structure this injected capability; and (iii) Foresight-Conditioned Reinforcement Learning (FC-RL) to refine the calibration and utility of the generated simulations. Evaluated on search and mathematical reasoning tasks, our approach consistently outperforms other training baselines. Our results demonstrate that effective internal world modeling in LLM agents requires a capability-first training pipeline to achieve grounded and calibrated foresight.

Multimodal web agents can assist humans in operating repetitive GUI tasks, where effective task planning is essential for decomposing complex tasks into executable actions. While small open source MLLMs are cost efficient and privacy preserving compared with commercial large models, they suffer from weak planning and limited cross website generalization. To address these limitations, we introduce the planning experience exploration and utilization (PEEU) method, which autonomously explores environments to discover experiences and utilizes hindsight experience to synthesize strictly aligned, high level training data. To quantitatively analyze the generalization behaviors driving this performance, we propose the task decomposition hierarchical analysis framework (TDHAF) to systematically study compositional generalization across three task granularities: low, middle and high levels. Our analysis reveals that mastering low level atomic skills does not guarantee high level planning competence, while high level task training yields stronger OOD generalization. Experiments on real world benchmarks demonstrate PEEU's superior effectiveness: our 7B model achieves 30.6% accuracy, outperforming the much larger Qwen2.5-VL-32B model. These demonstrate constructing hindsight high level tasks and leveraging experiences is crucial for OOD planning abilities of small MLLMs.

Large language models (LLMs) can improve autonomous driving planning but are costly to query online, and existing fast-slow planners often rely on hand-designed triggering rules that either over-call the slow system or call it at the wrong times. We formulate slow-system invocation as a resource-aware sequential decision problem and propose the Adaptive Slow-System Control Gate (ASSCG), which makes frame-level Query/Cache/Drop decisions to refresh, reuse, or suppress slow guidance. ASSCG uses an RWKV backbone for efficient long-horizon gating and is trained with supervised fine-tuning followed by GRPO-style compute-aware reinforcement fine-tuning. We apply ASSCG to two different fast-slow architectures: (i) AsyncDriver on nuPlan Hard20 closed-loop evaluation, where ASSCG improves score to 67.28 (+2.28) while reducing average end-to-end inference latency by 60%; and (ii) a RecogDrive-based dual system that we build by replacing its original VLM-2B module with a lightweight ViT-based fast planner and adding an LLM slow planner, evaluated on NAVSIM, where ASSCG achieves 91.4 PDMS (+0.6) and increases average speed by 25%. The project page, including video visualizations and additional results, is available at https://williamxuanyu.github.io/asscg/.

Object-Goal Navigation (ObjNav) requires embodied agents to autonomously locate specified targets using only egocentric visual observations. Existing monolithic methods struggle with long-horizon reasoning and generalize poorly to novel environments. To address these limitations, we propose SAGE-Nav, a novel hierarchical framework that integrates the reasoning capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) with dynamic scene graphs. Crucially, it decouples asynchronous global semantic planning from the high-frequency reactive control loop. The LLM serves as a global planner, decomposing abstract instructions into a sequence of semantically grounded waypoints. To translate these plans into dense multi-modal guidance, we design a Hierarchical Scene Graph Encoder (HSGE) that leverages relational graph convolutions to produce structure-aware embeddings preserving both semantic and spatial topology. Furthermore, we develop the Goal-aware Alignment-Fusion Network (GAFN) to dynamically fuse real-time perception with these structural priors. Using an adaptive gating mechanism with an explicit inductive bias, GAFN ensures robust visual-topological alignment for the low-level policy. Extensive evaluations in the i-THOR and RoboTHOR environments demonstrate that SAGE-Nav achieves state-of-the-art performance, delivering substantial gains in navigation efficiency and zero-shot generalization while maintaining the low control latency required for physical robotic deployment.

LLM agents increasingly operate in large tool ecosystems, where real-world tasks require discovering relevant tools, inferring implicit sub-goals, and adapting to dynamic environments over long horizons. However, existing benchmarks rarely evaluate planning under retrieval-limited tool visibility. To address this gap, we introduce PlanBench-XL, an interactive benchmark of 327 retail tasks over 1,665 tools that tests whether agents can iteratively retrieve usable tools, invoke them to uncover intermediate evidence for subsequent calls toward the final goal. PlanBench-XL further features an optional blocking mechanism that simulates real-world unpredictability through missing, failing, or distracting tool functions, forcing agents to detect disrupted paths and adapt at runtime. Experiments on ten leading LLMs show that massive-tool planning remains challenging: while GPT-5.4 achieves 51.90% accuracy in block-free settings, it collapses to 11.36% under the most severe blocking condition. Further analysis shows that agents are especially vulnerable when failures lack explicit error signals or when recovery requires longer alternative tool-use paths. These results establish PlanBench-XL as a testbed for diagnosing agentic planning failures and highlight the need for robust adaptive planning in long-horizon tasks with large, imperfect tool environments.

Translating natural-language planning intent into verified plans is a longstanding challenge: people communicate goals in language, while classical planners require formal PDDL specifications. Recent agentic frameworks bridge this gap by orchestrating a pool of specialized repair agents inside a verifier-checked refinement loop, but the orchestrator at the centre is itself a prompted frontier LLM, paying a frontier-LLM API call at every refinement step. We present HALO (Hybrid Agent-Learned Orchestrator), which trains the orchestrator from refinement trajectories that an external verifier has certified as ending in valid plans, across 11 PDDL domains. HALO pairs a small QLoRA-tuned policy with three hardcoded rules for trivially decidable selections, and operates over an expanded 21-agent action space. Unlike approaches that prompt a frontier LLM at every step or learn an orchestrator from sparse end-of-episode rewards, our key observation is that the verifier already provides strong guidance: every accepted trajectory is a sequence of demonstrably correct (state, agent) decisions, directly usable as supervision. Across PlanBench, Natural Plan, and classical planning benchmarks, HALO matches or exceeds the GPT-5-mini prompted baseline on success rate, sits within three percentage points of the stronger Gemini-3-Flash prompted baseline, reduces orchestration cost by more than an order of magnitude ($0.18 to $0.004 per task against GPT-5-mini, roughly 45$\times$ cheaper; roughly 15$\times$ cheaper than Gemini-3-Flash), and cuts total LLM calls per episode by 40 to 50 percent.

Interactive travel planning has become a popular use case for language models. Agents are deployed to manage evolving preferences and unexpected disruptions over multiple turns. Such settings require models to make complex, profile-conditioned planning decisions. However, existing benchmarks often evaluate feasibility, personalization, or interaction in relatively isolated settings. We therefore introduce Trip+ to measure the ability of agents to plan travel holistically. In Trip+, given traveler profiles and dynamic interactions, agents must generate and revise minute-level itineraries. End-to-end traveler experiences are evaluated via an LLM-based simulator, enabling the assessment of subjective metrics like fatigue. Our scenarios range from simple request resolutions to complex environment-driven replanning. We evaluate 18 LMs and find a consistent gap in experiential quality. Models favor technically feasible but exhausting itineraries that diverge sharply from profiled traveler preferences.

Though robotic systems are now being commercialized and deployed in various industries, many of these systems are highly specialized and often require an advanced skill set to operate and ensure they perform as instructed. To mitigate this problem, we recently introduced a mission planner leveraging LLMs to synthesize mission plans in precision agriculture based on mission descriptions provided in natural language. While the system demonstrates impressive performance, it also suffers from the inherent ambiguities of natural language. In this paper, we extend our system to address this issue by introducing multiple feedback loops in the planning architecture that leverage linear temporal logic (LTL) to ensure the mission planning system meets the specifications formulated by the user while still using natural language. To mitigate potential bias, this is achieved by using two different commercial LLMs in charge of the specification and verification subtasks. Through extensive experiments, we highlight the strengths and limitations of integrating mission verification into a fully autonomous pipeline, particularly regarding an LLM's ability to generate valuable LTL formulas, and show how our proposed implementation addresses and solves these challenges.

Large language models (LLMs) remain limited in multi-agent planning because independently generated plans can create coordination failures such as spatial collisions, resource contention, and temporal deadlocks. We introduce Tensor-Coord, a multilinear algebra framework that represents the joint plan of N agents as a third-order tensor $T \in R^{N \times H \times A}$ over agents, timesteps, and actions. Canonical Polyadic (CP) and Tucker decompositions are used to identify latent coordination structure. The minimal epsilon-approximate CP rank R* defines a computable coordination complexity measure, with $CC(Pi)=(R*-N)/N$. We prove that R*=N is necessary and sufficient for plan independence. The residual $E=T-T_{R*}$ defines a conflict score over agent pairs, timesteps, and actions, localizing failures without domain-specific rules. Tucker factors provide interpretable agent roles, temporal phases, and action clusters that are converted into natural language constraints for iterative LLM replanning. Experiments on multi-robot delivery tasks across Easy (2 agents, 5x5 grid), Medium (3 agents, 5x5 grid), and Hard (4 agents, 5x5 grid) settings show convergence to conflict-free plans in 100% of 2-agent cases within 1.4 iterations on average, 80% of 3-agent cases within 3.2 iterations, and 60% of 4-agent cases within 4.0 iterations. CP rank scaled approximately linearly as $R*(N) = 3.9N + 0.5$, supporting its use as a predictor of coordination complexity.

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed as planners for autonomous agents in household environments. While existing benchmarks evaluate whether LLM-generated plans execute successfully, they overlook a critical type of failure: latent failures. Unlike immediate failures that trigger instant feedback at execution time and enable timely correction, latent failures do not immediately halt plan execution but silently compromise goal achievement. In severe cases, they cause irreversible harm. To address this gap, we introduce SIMMER, a benchmark for evaluating latent failures in LLM planning through a human-curated symbolic world model grounded in the kitchen domain. SIMMER defines a world model comprising 77 actions, 262 unique objects, and approximately 46,800 possible interactions that are semantically realistic, derived from real-world cooking scripts. It then leverages a state machine executor that validates plans against the world model and detects immediate precondition violations, latent hazards, and irreversible failures. Experiments across six LLMs show that even frontier models achieve at most 17% error-free plans. Moreover, up to 56% of plans contain latent failures, the majority of which lead to irreversible consequences. We further demonstrate that explicit state reasoning via counterfactual foresight simulation can reduce latent failures by up to 72% and irreversible cases by up to 75%, suggesting a promising direction for more robust LLM planners.

Compact language models (LMs) reduce cost, latency, and deployment risk for tool agents. Yet MCP-style tool use requires more than isolated function calling: an agent must discover tools from live catalogs, satisfy schemas, preserve dependencies across intermediate outputs, and ground final responses in executed evidence. Small planners often generate plausible workflow graphs that fail under tool resolution, parameter validation, dependency tracking, or execution. We argue that this failure mode is poorly handled by small-corpus distillation. A few hundred teacher traces can teach workflow format, but rarely cover the recovery behavior needed to repair failed plans over changing tool catalogs. We introduce Evoflux, an inference-time evolutionary search method that treats compact tool use as the repair of executable tool workflows. It evolves typed workflow graphs through structured edits, execution feedback, adaptive intensity, meta-guided redesign, and diversity pruning. On held-out MCP-Bench tasks spanning live MCP servers and 250 tools, Evoflux raises execution feasibility from roughly 3% to 17-24% across small planners. In contrast, SFT and SFT+DPO on the same search-mined data match, underperform, or collapse below zero-shot performance; ReAct reaches higher peaks, but with higher variance and token cost. These results show that execution-grounded search is more reliable under scarce teacher-trace budgets.

Problem, Research Strategy, and Findings: The rise of large language models (LLMs) raises a key question for urban planning: which forms of professional planning knowledge can AI replicate, and which still require human judgment? Although AI tools are increasingly used in planning practice, there is still no systematic framework for testing whether they can reason with the contextual sensitivity, value awareness, and institutional literacy central to planning expertise. This paper introduces Urban Planning Bench (UPBench), a domain-specific evaluation framework that assesses LLM reasoning through a 4x5 matrix of four knowledge pillars and five cognitive levels adapted from Bloom's revised taxonomy. Evaluating 25 LLMs with automated scoring and expert review, we find a non-monotonic cognitive curve: models perform better on higher-order analytical tasks than on factual recall and integrative judgment. This suggests that planning knowledge often treated as lower-order is deeply shaped by institutional, jurisdictional, and temporal context, making it hard for LLMs to generalize. We summarize these limits as four epistemic diagnostics: regulatory hallucination, conceptual conflation, wickedness paralysis, and phronetic deficit. Takeaway for Practice: The findings support differential delegation in planning. LLMs can assist with cross-disciplinary synthesis, literature review, scenario generation, and preliminary policy analysis. However, they remain unreliable for jurisdiction-specific regulation, normative conflict resolution, and context-sensitive procedure. Agencies should require verification for AI-assisted regulatory analysis, while planning education should emphasize institutional literacy, normative judgment, and contextual sensitivity.

Large Language Models enable flexible natural-language planning but remain unreliable in determinism-critical domains due to their probabilistic nature. This limitation is especially problematic in running planning, where violating safety rules can lead to safety risks. We propose SafeRun, a framework for deterministic LLM-based planning via a decoupled architecture. SafeRun separates soft interpretation by an LLM from hard constraint enforcement by a deterministic solver, ensuring strict safety constraints while preserving natural-language flexibility. To validate SafeRun, we build a comprehensive benchmark for running planning under realistic physiological and safety constraints. Experiments across five LLMs show that SafeRun achieves 100% safety score (vs.\ 79.1% PE average and 97.6% CodeAct average) while maintaining competitive instruction-following scores. The SafeRun benchmark is publicly available at \href{https://huggingface.co/datasets/zzp-seeker/SafeRun-RunPlanning-Benchmark}{huggingface}.

Many real-world queries over personal data span multiple applications and require structured planning, as individual tools expose only partial information. While LLMs show strong reasoning and tool use, reliably executing multi-step, cross-tool queries remains challenging. We introduce a system that converts natural language queries into structured graphs and executes them via a deterministic planner. Our approach uses depth-first search to resolve dependencies and combine results across tools, improving reliability and enabling queries beyond traditional keyword-based search. We demonstrate high accuracy even with smaller or locally hosted LLMs.

Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) fails systematically on queries requiring structural reasoning over interconnected entities. We compare eight retrieval architectures for aerospace supply chain intelligence, progressing from text retrieval through graph traversal to graph computation. Using a 46-node knowledge graph with 64 typed edges, we evaluate 23 queries across 10 intent categories and demonstrate that five query classes are structurally unreachable for vector retrieval. Our central finding is the operator vocabulary thesis: the barrier to LLM-based graph reasoning is not model intelligence but the computational operators available as tools. An LLM Query Planner with 9 typed traversal primitives outperforms bespoke handlers (F1 = 0.632 vs. 0.472) while generalizing to unseen queries. Adding 6 graph computation tools, the LLM selectively adopts them for exactly the query categories where traversal fails. We also identify a measurement gap: entity-level F1 systematically underscores structural queries where comprehensive answers are correct.

Planning for real-world problems by language models often involves both world and user constraints, which may not be fully specified upfront and are progressively disclosed through interaction. However, existing benchmarks still underexplore adaptive planning under such progressively revealed dual constraints. To address this gap, we introduce AdaPlanBench, a dynamic interactive benchmark for evaluating whether Large Language Model (LLM) agents can adaptively plan and re-plan under progressively revealed world and user constraints. AdaPlanBench is built on 307 household tasks, with a scalable constraint construction pipeline that augments each task with dual constraints. At runtime, agents interact with the environment in a multi-turn protocol where hidden constraints are revealed only when the agent proposes a plan that violates them, requiring iterative plan revision under accumulating feedback. This makes planning challenging, as agents must infer and track constraints from feedback while re-planning effectively. Experiments on ten leading LLMs show that adaptive planning under dual constraints remains challenging, with the best model reaching only 67.75% accuracy. We further observe that performance degrades as more constraints accumulate, with user constraints posing a particularly large challenge and failures often stemming from weaker physical grounding and reduced effectiveness. These results establish AdaPlanBench as a testbed for dual-constrained interactive planning and highlight the challenge of reliable adaptation to dynamically revealed constraints in LLM agents.

Verifiable reward training has improved mathematical and coding reasoning, but these domains capture only part of step-by-step decision making. Many real-world tasks require finding a high-value feasible plan among many valid alternatives. We introduce OPT*, a scalable family of optimization-style tasks for training and evaluating LLM step-by-step optimization-like reasoning along a complexity axis: each task provides a feasibility checker and evaluator, while a complexity parameter expands the search space without requiring new human labels. This motivates studying these tasks in two regimes: (i) solver-guided online policy optimization, which uses a solver as a value oracle for partial states and applies rank-based reward shaping to reinforce better next steps, and (ii) search-based offline RL when such solvers are unavailable. Theoretically, we relate success in large search spaces to the information a reasoner extracts per unit of search budget. Empirically, we ablate the ingredients that make search efficient on OPT* and show that training on OPT* improves step-by-step optimization-like reasoning.

Planning is central to LLM agents: before acting, an agent must decompose goals, select tools, reason over constraints, and decide when a task is infeasible. Yet existing agent evaluations often report only end-to-end success, making it difficult to determine whether failures stem from planning or execution. We introduce Agent Planning Benchmark (APB), a planning-specific diagnostic benchmark with 4,209 multimodal cases across 22 domains and five settings, covering holistic planning, feedback-conditioned step-wise planning, and robustness under extraneous tools, broken tools, and unsolvable tasks. Across 12 MLLMs, APB reveals systematic weaknesses in long-horizon planning, tool-noise robustness, calibrated refusal, and inference-time refinement. We further validate APB on 200 ToolSandbox tasks and 200 $τ^2$-bench tasks, where APB-guided refinement consistently improves plan correctness, plan grade, and downstream execution metrics across three representative models. APB thus serves as an upstream diagnostic complement to execution benchmarks. The APB benchmark and code are available in \href{https://github.com/Mikivishy/AgentPlanningBenchmark}{this URL}.

Simulation environments are useful for both robot policy learning and planning verification and validation. Traditionally, the process of creating a simulation was onerous. Creating a bespoke simulation environment for each individual environment that a robot would operate in was simply infeasible. In this work, we introduce PerceptTwin, a fully automatic pipeline that constructs interactive simulations directly from semantic scene representations produced by a robot's perception stack. PerceptTwin combines open-vocabulary object maps with 3D asset generation, affordance prediction, and commonsense condition checking. These interactive simulations can be used to validate and refine plans before they are executed on the robot hardware. Borrowing from the AI alignment literature, we also introduce an LLM judge that verifies plan correctness and alignment with human preferences. Experiments show that PerceptTwin feedback allows LLM planners to refine plans, enhance safety, and resist harmful black-box prompting attacks. In our suite of tasks, PerceptTwin improves plan success by an average of approximately 39% for GPT5, GPT5Mini, and GPT5Nano planners. Additionally, PerceptTwin also improves human plan verification by up to 18% on average for plans that fail due to unfilled skill preconditions. Our results demonstrate the potential of open-vocabulary scene simulation from robot perception as a foundation for safer, more reliable robot planning.

Supervised fine-tuning (SFT) improves end-to-end classical planning in large language models (LLMs), but do these models also learn to represent and reason about the planning problems they are solving? Due to the relative complexity of classical planning problems and the challenge that end-to-end plan generation poses for LLMs, it has been difficult to explore this question. In our work, we devise and perform a series of interpretability experiments that holistically interrogate world model recovery by examining both internal representations and generative capabilities of fine-tuned LLMs. We find that: a) Supervised fine-tuning on valid action sequences enables LLMs to linearly encode action validity and some state predicates. b) Models that struggle to use output probabilities for classifying action validity may still learn internal representations that separate valid from invalid actions. c) Broader state space coverage during fine-tuning, such as from random walk data, yields more accurate recovery of the underlying world model. In summary, this work contributes a recipe for applying interpretability techniques to planning LLMs and generates insights that shed light on open questions about how knowledge is represented in LLMs.

Existing LLM graph benchmarks typically ask models to answer graph-theoretic questions or compute symbolic solutions rather than construct spatial layouts. Within-task difficulty is also primarily stratified by vertex count. However, existing research also suggests that task difficulty is more closely related to the number of constraints imposed by the edges than to the number of vertices being arranged. We introduce PlanarBench, a benchmark that asks models to produce crossing-free ASCII drawings of planar graphs given only an edge list. Across 91 model configurations and 199 non-isomorphic connected planar graphs with 2-7 vertices, edge count is more strongly associated with mean task score than vertex count ($r=-0.85$) versus ($r=-0.47$) and remains strongly associated after controlling for vertex count ($r_p=-0.80$). PlanarBench provides a controlled setting for separating these two difficulty axes. In addition, neither drawing area nor total response length demonstrated a meaningful correlation with score, which is evidence against a simple output-size explanation. Performance varies widely: the best model scores 159.5 out of 199, most models below 30B parameters score under 25, and substantial failures remain among frontier systems.

The development of Large Language Models (LLMs) has significantly improved travel planning applications, yet evaluating such models is limited by existing benchmarks' limitations: 1) overemphasis on constraint compliance, neglecting multi-dimensional qualities like spatio-temporal cost; 2) datasets lacking real-world authenticity and coverage in key areas (e.g., lodging, transport); and 3) isolated daily plan assessments that miss critical details (e.g., the impact of daily accommodation and visit pacing) needed for entire plan's evaluation. To address this gap, we introduce TravelEval, a realistic and comprehensive benchmark. TravelEval features 1) a novel six-dimensional evaluation framework to holistically assess plans across accuracy, compliance, temporality, spatiality, economy, and utility dimensions; 2) a highly realistic data sandbox with precise accommodation pricing and authentic intercity transportation data; and 3) a simulation-based global evaluation method that emulates complete travel plans with API-integrated geographic information and fine-grained queuing time. Evaluating 12 mainstream approaches with TravelEval reveals several valuable insights, such that LLMs struggle with globally-optimized multi-dimensional planning (especially in spatio-temporal reasoning and budget compliance), and agentic reasoning strategies offer no consistent improvement. Concisely, TravelEval facilitates travel plan evaluation via grounded spatio-temporal emulation and comprehensive metrics, providing a robust foundation for advancing LLM-powered travel planning research and applications.

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 work, we propose a prototype machine-to-machine (M2M) knowledge-guided Large Language Model (LLM) framework for automated radiotherapy treatment planning. In the proposed paradigm, Treatment Planning Parameter (TPP) distribution knowledge discovered by a Deep Reinforcement Learning (DRL) agent is transferred to an LLM agent through in-context learning, enabling autonomous iterative planning without human intervention. While standard LLM-based planning often lacks physical intuition and struggles with convergence, the integration of DRL-derived guidance constrains the agent to a physically valid parameter space. Experimental evaluations are performed across three diverse planning scenarios: basic prostate cases, complex prostate configurations with increased organ-at-risk (OAR) constraints, and liver cases. The evaluation results demonstrate that the guided LLM agent consistently achieves optimal planning scores while significantly reducing the number of iterations compared to unguided planning. Analysis of the final TPP configurations reveals that the agent successfully learns a hierarchical priority of objectives, effectively restoring a logical "cause-and-effect" relationship between parameter tuning and dosimetric outcomes. Crucially, this prototype framework exhibits robust generalizability, maintaining high planning quality regardless of specific patient anatomy, treatment site, or initial plan quality. By bridging the specialized optimization of DRL with the adaptive reasoning of LLMs, this M2M framework establishes a scalable foundation towards generalizable autonomous treatment planning, ultimately benefiting clinical practice in realistic environments.

Large Language Model (LLM)-based navigation systems commonly construct explicit spatial representations (e.g., topological graphs, semantic raster maps) and translate them into textual descriptions as LLMs' inputs. However, the linguistic structures of such text-based spatial representations and the choices of contextual features (e.g., topology, geometry) they contain are often treated as neutral engineering decisions rather than key factors that shape LLMs' behavior. To fill the gap, we propose a dual-interventional framework that disentangles linguistic structures from different contextual cues to evaluate the linguistic inductive bias of LLMs for navigation planning. In the framework, representation intervention varies the linguistic format and the degree of linguistic compression, clarifying when linguistic representations support or inhibit navigation planning. Context intervention, combined with contextual feature combination and conflict probing, explicitly clarifies the preferences and weaknesses of LLMs when processing different contextual cues. Experiments across diverse spatial reasoning tasks and multiple model scales reveal a consistent pattern: topological information is a sturdy shield and the backbone of robust planning; linguistic format is a double-edged sword whose effect depends on model size, task demands, and the compression level; and semantic information is a fatal Achilles' heel -- incorrect semantic cues can systematically derail the planning process. Overall, our study shows that effective text-based spatial representations in LLM-based navigation should preserve topological integrity, calibrate representational compression to model capacity, and ensure semantic correctness, rather than simply adopting a single representation. Our code is publicly available at https://github.com/jonesdong150/LLM-Navigation-Inductive-Bias.