Testing the Planning Claims of LLM-Based Agents against Formal Semantics
arXiv:2610.22469v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: LLM-based agents are increasingly credited with the competences of practical reasoning: planning, monitoring, and correcting their own actions. Their success is attributed to the prompting strategies and agent architectures built around the model, such as chain-of-thought, search-based prompting, self-refinement, reflection, critics and tool-using loops. Yet these claims are usually supported by end-to-end success rates, which show only whether a task was completed, or by LLM judges, which are not verifiers. We test LLM planning against formal se
阅读原文 · arXiv 人工智能本文由 SoccerDream AI 自动聚合索引，内容版权归原作者与 arXiv 人工智能 所有。
本站仅作技术动态聚合，不构成任何形式的建议。
本站仅作技术动态聚合，不构成任何形式的建议。