REVIEW 1 cited by
FLAP: Flow-Adhering Planning with Constrained Decoding in LLMs
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
Planning is a crucial task for agents in task oriented dialogs (TODs). Human agents typically resolve user issues by following predefined workflows, decomposing workflow steps into actionable items, and performing actions by executing APIs in order; all of which require reasoning and planning. With the recent advances in LLMs, there have been increasing attempts to use them for task planning and API usage. However, the faithfulness of the plans to predefined workflows and API dependencies, is not guaranteed with LLMs. Moreover, workflows in real life are often custom-defined and prone to changes; hence, adaptation is desirable. To study this, we propose the problem of faithful planning in TODs that needs to resolve user intents by following predefined flows and preserving API dependencies. To solve this problem, we propose FLAP, a Flow-Adhering Planning algorithm based on constrained decoding with lookahead heuristic for LLMs. Our algorithm alleviates the need for finetuning LLMs using domain specific (plan/dependency) data, enables quick adaptation to predefined flows, and outperforms other decoding and prompting-based baselines. Further, our algorithm empowers smaller LLMs (7B) to perform at par larger LLMs (30B-40B).
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
LLaPa: A Vision-Language Model Framework for Counterfactual-Aware Procedural Planning
A VLM-based planner with task-oriented segmentation reranking and a clause-level condition retriever reports state-of-the-art scores on ActPlan-1K and ALFRED, though the reported ablation numbers are internally inconsistent.
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.