Paper Detail

Which LLM is Best for Translating Natural Language Goals to PDDL

Tomas Balyo, Lukas Chrpa, G. Michael Youngblood

arxiv Score 14.8

Published 2026-09-16 · First seen 2026-09-17

General AI

Abstract

Bridging the gap between human intent and machine execution remains a challenge in automated planning, where expressing goals in formal languages like PDDL restricts accessibility to non-experts. This paper empirically evaluates whether current Large Language Models (LLMs) can reliably translate natural language testing goals, written in informal language by video game testers, into well-formed PDDL targets suitable for classical planning. We present a carefully designed prompt template, integrating insights from iterative experimentation, aimed at maximizing both accuracy and response coherence from multiple state-of-the-art LLMs. Six contemporary models are systematically assessed on correctness, speed, and error tendencies using real-world, domain-specific benchmarks. All models demonstrate high correctness, exceeding 92\%, with Gemini 2.5 Flash achieving the highest accuracy at 96\% and the lowest incidence of false positives, while GPT-4.1 leads in response speed. Despite these advances, critical distinctions exist in model performance, and occasional failures arise from language ambiguity and limitations in domain representation. Our analysis underscores both the significant progress and ongoing gaps in enabling LLMs to act as robust bridges between natural language objectives and automated planning pipelines.

Workflow Status

Review status
pending
Role
unreviewed
Read priority
now
Vote
Not set.
Saved
no
Collections
Not filed yet.
Next action
Not filled yet.

Reading Brief

No structured notes yet. Add `summary_sections`, `why_relevant`, `claim_impact`, or `next_action` in `papers.jsonl` to enrich this view.

Why It Surfaced

No ranking explanation is available yet.

Tags

No tags.

BibTeX

@article{balyo2026which,
  title = {Which LLM is Best for Translating Natural Language Goals to PDDL},
  author = {Tomas Balyo and Lukas Chrpa and G. Michael Youngblood},
  year = {2026},
  abstract = {Bridging the gap between human intent and machine execution remains a challenge in automated planning, where expressing goals in formal languages like PDDL restricts accessibility to non-experts. This paper empirically evaluates whether current Large Language Models (LLMs) can reliably translate natural language testing goals, written in informal language by video game testers, into well-formed PDDL targets suitable for classical planning. We present a carefully designed prompt template, integra},
  url = {https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.18731},
  keywords = {cs.AI},
  eprint = {2609.18731},
  archiveprefix = {arXiv},
}

Metadata

{}