REVIEW 1 cited by
Conversational Planning for Personal Plans
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
The language generation and reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs) have enabled conversational systems with impressive performance in a variety of tasks, from code generation, to composing essays, to passing STEM and legal exams, to a new paradigm for knowledge search. Besides those short-term use applications, LLMs are increasingly used to help with real-life goals or tasks that take a long time to complete, involving multiple sessions across days, weeks, months, or even years. Thus to enable conversational systems for long term interactions and tasks, we need language-based agents that can plan for long horizons. Traditionally, such capabilities were addressed by reinforcement learning agents with hierarchical planning capabilities. In this work, we explore a novel architecture where the LLM acts as the meta-controller deciding the agent's next macro-action, and tool use augmented LLM-based option policies execute the selected macro-action. We instantiate this framework for a specific set of macro-actions enabling adaptive planning for users' personal plans through conversation and follow-up questions collecting user feedback. We show how this paradigm can be applicable in scenarios ranging from tutoring for academic and non-academic tasks to conversational coaching for personal health plans.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
LLM-generated personalized nudges for improving pro-environmental behavior: Field evidence from resource conservation
LLM-personalized weekly nudges cut electricity use by 0.56 kWh per room-day (18.3 percentage points more than text-only feedback) in a five-week randomized trial.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.