REVIEW 2 cited by
Adaptive Domain Modeling with Language Models: A Multi-Agent Approach to Task Planning
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
Adaptive Domain Modeling with Language Models: A Multi-Agent Approach to Task Planning
read the original abstract
We introduce TAPAS (Task-based Adaptation and Planning using AgentS), a multi-agent framework that integrates Large Language Models (LLMs) with symbolic planning to solve complex tasks without the need for manually defined environment models. TAPAS employs specialized LLM-based agents that collaboratively generate and adapt domain models, initial states, and goal specifications as needed using structured tool-calling mechanisms. Through this tool-based interaction, downstream agents can request modifications from upstream agents, enabling adaptation to novel attributes and constraints without manual domain redefinition. A ReAct (Reason+Act)-style execution agent, coupled with natural language plan translation, bridges the gap between dynamically generated plans and real-world robot capabilities. TAPAS demonstrates strong performance in benchmark planning domains and in the VirtualHome simulated real-world environment.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
HEART: Coordination of Heterogeneous Expert Agents for Physically Grounded Robotic Task Planning
HEART coordinates role-specialized LLM agents to decompose instructions, validate reachability and constraints, and synthesize executable robotic plans, showing higher success than single-LLM baselines on household tasks.
-
The Periodic Table of LLM Reasoning: A Structured Survey of Reasoning Paradigms, Methods, and Failure Modes
A literature survey that introduces a taxonomy for LLM reasoning paradigms, analyzes methodological trends, and synthesizes failure modes from over 300 papers.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.