<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Generalized Planning in PDDL Domains with Pretrained Large Language Models · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2305.11014/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2305.11014/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Generalized Planning in PDDL Domains with Pretrained Large Language Models — mentioned by YeGoblynQueenne</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40333486</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:2305.11014:40333486</guid><pubDate>Sun, 12 May 2024 11:13:14 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;From the tweet: &amp;gt;&amp;gt; And yet the practitioners of CoT swear that any and every problem can be solved with LLM by giving it a bit of a CoT help. For example, see this arxiv paper: Generalized Planning in PDDL Domains with Pretrained Large Language Models https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.11014 Where the authors conclude: In this work, we showed that GPT-4 with CoT summarization and automated debugging is a surprisingly strong generalized planner in PDDL domains. The author of the tweet is an expert on planning and he&amp;#x27;s responding to that kind of thing.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2305.11014/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cs.AI</category></item><item><title>Generalized Planning in PDDL Domains with Pretrained Large Language Models — mentioned by openquery</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38433446</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:2305.11014:38433446</guid><pubDate>Mon, 27 Nov 2023 15:34:41 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;Can automated theorem provers solve mathematical olympiad problems in a reasonable time given enough compute? LLMs are quite good at generating semantically correct language. I remember reading a paper about extending the planning capabilities of GPT-4 by using a Planning Domain Definition Language [0]. By that same logic could an LLM not translate the olympiad problem into a form suitable for a theorem prover? [0] https://arxiv.org/pdf/2305.11014.pdf&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2305.11014/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cs.AI</category></item></channel></rss>
