Robust Planning with Compound LLM Architectures: An LLM-Modulo Approach

Previous work has attempted to boost Large Language Model (LLM) performance on planning and scheduling tasks through a variety of prompt engineering techniques. While these methods can work within the distributions tested, they are neither robust nor predictable. This limitation can be addressed through compound LLM architectures where LLMs work in conjunction with other components to ensure reliability. In this paper, we present a technical evaluation of a compound LLM architecture--the LLM-Modulo framework. In this framework, an LLM is paired with a complete set of sound verifiers that validate its output, re-prompting it if it fails. This approach ensures that the system can never output any fallacious output, and therefore that every output generated is guaranteed correct--something previous techniques have not been able to claim. Our results, evaluated across four scheduling domains, demonstrate significant performance gains with the LLM-Modulo framework using various models. Additionally, we explore modifications to the base configuration of the framework and assess their impact on overall system performance.

Planning in Strawberry Fields: Evaluating and Improving the Planning and Scheduling Capabilities of LRM o1

The ability to plan a course of action that achieves a desired state of affairs has long been considered a core competence of intelligent agents and has been an integral part of AI research since its inception. With the advent of large language models (LLMs), there has been considerable interest in the question of whether or not they possess such planning abilities, but -- despite the slew of new private and open source LLMs since GPT3 -- progress has remained slow. OpenAI claims that their recent o1 (Strawberry) model has been specifically constructed and trained to escape the normal limitations of autoregressive LLMs -- making it a new kind of model: a Large Reasoning Model (LRM). In this paper, we evaluate the planning capabilities of two LRMs (o1-preview and o1-mini) on both planning and scheduling benchmarks. We see that while o1 does seem to offer significant improvements over autoregressive LLMs, this comes at a steep inference cost, while still failing to provide any guarantees over what it generates. We also show that combining o1 models with external verifiers -- in a so-called LRM-Modulo system -- guarantees the correctness of the combined system's output while further improving performance.

Superior Computer Chess with Model Predictive Control, Reinforcement Learning, and Rollout

In this paper we apply model predictive control (MPC), rollout, and reinforcement learning (RL) methodologies to computer chess. We introduce a new architecture for move selection, within which available chess engines are used as components. One engine is used to provide position evaluations in an approximation in value space MPC/RL scheme, while a second engine is used as nominal opponent, to emulate or approximate the moves of the true opponent player. We show that our architecture improves substantially the performance of the position evaluation engine. In other words our architecture provides an additional layer of intelligence, on top of the intelligence of the engines on which it is based. This is true for any engine, regardless of its strength: top engines such as Stockfish and Komodo Dragon (of varying strengths), as well as weaker engines. Structurally, our basic architecture selects moves by a one-move lookahead search, with an intermediate move generated by a nominal opponent engine, and followed by a position evaluation by another chess engine. Simpler schemes that forego the use of the nominal opponent, also perform better than the position evaluator, but not quite by as much. More complex schemes, involving multistep lookahead, may also be used and generally tend to perform better as the length of the lookahead increases. Theoretically, our methodology relies on generic cost improvement properties and the superlinear convergence framework of Newton's method, which fundamentally underlies approximation in value space, and related MPC/RL and rollout/policy iteration schemes. A critical requirement of this framework is that the first lookahead step should be executed exactly. This fact has guided our architectural choices, and is apparently an important factor in improving the performance of even the best available chess engines.

Robust Planning with LLM-Modulo Framework: Case Study in Travel Planning

As the applicability of Large Language Models (LLMs) extends beyond traditional text processing tasks, there is a burgeoning interest in their potential to excel in planning and reasoning assignments, realms traditionally reserved for System 2 cognitive competencies. Despite their perceived versatility, the research community is still unraveling effective strategies to harness these models in such complex domains. The recent discourse introduced by the paper on LLM Modulo marks a significant stride, proposing a conceptual framework that enhances the integration of LLMs into diverse planning and reasoning activities. This workshop paper delves into the practical application of this framework within the domain of travel planning, presenting a specific instance of its implementation. We are using the Travel Planning benchmark by the OSU NLP group, a benchmark for evaluating the performance of LLMs in producing valid itineraries based on user queries presented in natural language. While popular methods of enhancing the reasoning abilities of LLMs such as Chain of Thought, ReAct, and Reflexion achieve a meager 0%, 0.6%, and 0% with GPT3.5-Turbo respectively, our operationalization of the LLM-Modulo framework for TravelPlanning domain provides a remarkable improvement, enhancing baseline performances by 4.6x for GPT4-Turbo and even more for older models like GPT3.5-Turbo from 0% to 5%. Furthermore, we highlight the other useful roles of LLMs in the planning pipeline, as suggested in LLM-Modulo, which can be reliably operationalized such as extraction of useful critics and reformulator for critics.