GenPlan: Generative Sequence Models as Adaptive Planners
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sequence models have demonstrated remarkable success in behavioral planning by leveraging previously collected demonstrations. However, solving multi-task missions remains a significant challenge, particularly when the planner must adapt to unseen constraints and tasks, such as discovering goals and unlocking doors. Such behavioral planning problems are challenging to solve due to: a) agents failing to adapt beyond the single task learned through their reward function, and b) inability to generalize to new environments, e.g., those with walls and locked doors, when trained only in planar environments. Consequently, state-of-the-art decision-making methods are limited to missions where the required tasks are well-represented in the training demonstrations and can be solved within a short (temporal) planning horizon. To address this, we propose GenPlan: a stochastic and adaptive planner that leverages discrete-flow models for generative sequence modeling, enabling sample-efficient exploration and exploitation. This framework relies on an iterative denoising procedure to generate a sequence of goals and actions. This approach captures multi-modal action distributions and facilitates goal and task discovery, thereby generalizing to out-of-distribution tasks and environments, i.e., missions not part of the training data. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our method through multiple simulation environments. Notably, GenPlan outperforms state-of-the-art methods by over 10% on adaptive planning tasks, where the agent adapts to multi-task missions while leveraging demonstrations from single-goal-reaching tasks.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".