REVIEW 1 cited by
Make Planning Research Rigorous Again!
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
Make Planning Research Rigorous Again!
read the original abstract
In over sixty years since its inception, the field of planning has made significant contributions to both the theory and practice of building planning software that can solve a never-before-seen planning problem. This was done through established practices of rigorous design and evaluation of planning systems. It is our position that this rigor should be applied to the current trend of work on planning with large language models. One way to do so is by correctly incorporating the insights, tools, and data from the automated planning community into the design and evaluation of LLM-based planners. The experience and expertise of the planning community are not just important from a historical perspective; the lessons learned could play a crucial role in accelerating the development of LLM-based planners. This position is particularly important in light of the abundance of recent works that replicate and propagate the same pitfalls that the planning community has encountered and learned from. We believe that avoiding such known pitfalls will contribute greatly to the progress in building LLM-based planners and to planning in general.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Frontier Large Language Models Rival State-of-the-Art Planners
Frontier LLMs now match or exceed state-of-the-art classical planners on IPC planning tasks, with Gemini 3.1 Pro solving 245 of 360 tasks versus 234 for the best baseline.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.