Symbolic Planning and Code Generation for Grounded Dialogue
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Large language models (LLMs) excel at processing and generating both text and code. However, LLMs have had limited applicability in grounded task-oriented dialogue as they are difficult to steer toward task objectives and fail to handle novel grounding. We present a modular and interpretable grounded dialogue system that addresses these shortcomings by composing LLMs with a symbolic planner and grounded code execution. Our system consists of a reader and planner: the reader leverages an LLM to convert partner utterances into executable code, calling functions that perform grounding. The translated code's output is stored to track dialogue state, while a symbolic planner determines the next appropriate response. We evaluate our system's performance on the demanding OneCommon dialogue task, involving collaborative reference resolution on abstract images of scattered dots. Our system substantially outperforms the previous state-of-the-art, including improving task success in human evaluations from 56% to 69% in the most challenging setting.
Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 18 of its 36 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 26 Oct 2023.
Builds on
18 of 36 references.
References · 18
- 2017Deep reinforcement learning from human preferencescited by 3,912
- 2022Code as Policies: Language Model Programs for Embodied Controlcited by 1,210
- 2023ViperGPT: Visual Inference via Python Execution for Reasoningcited by 603
- 2022Visual Programming: Compositional visual reasoning without trainingcited by 516
- 2018Decoupling Strategy and Generation in Negotiation Dialoguescited by 162
- 2021NeuroLogic A*esque Decoding: Constrained Text Generation with Lookahead Heuristicscited by 154
- 2017Inferring and Executing Programs for Visual Reasoningcited by 130
- 2023From Word Models to World Models: Translating from Natural Language to the Probabilistic Language of Thoughtcited by 119
- 2023On the Planning Abilities of Large Language Models (A Critical Investigation with a Proposed Benchmark)cited by 85
- 2017Learning Symmetric Collaborative Dialogue Agents with Dynamic Knowledge Graph Embeddingscited by 59
- 2019The PhotoBook Dataset: Building Common Ground through Visually-Grounded Dialoguecited by 46
- 2019A Natural Language Corpus of Common Grounding under Continuous and Partially-Observable Contextcited by 35
6 more
- 2017Hierarchical Text Generation and Planning for Strategic Dialoguecited by 23
- 2016Learning Executable Semantic Parsers for Natural Language Understandingcited by 21
- 2021Open-domain clarification question generation without question examplescited by 20
- 2021Reference-Centric Models for Grounded Collaborative Dialoguecited by 15
- 2017Learning an Executable Neural Semantic Parsercited by 14
- 2018Planning, Inference and Pragmatics in Sequential Language Gamescited by 12
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2024: 3; 2025: 2.
5 papers.
- 2024BigCodeBench: Benchmarking Code Generation with Diverse Function Calls and Complex Instructionscited by 546
- 2024Can LLM Graph Reasoning Generalize beyond Pattern Memorization?cited by 47
- 2025Shoot First, Ask Questions Later? Building Rational Agents that Explore and Act Like Peoplecited by 9
- 2024Retrieval-Augmented Code Generation for Situated Action Generation: A Case Study on Minecraftcited by 4
- 2025Program Synthesis Dialog Agents for Interactive Decision-Makingcited by 1
- 2025Shoot First, Ask Questions Later? Building Rational Agents that Explore and Act Like People23 Oct 2025
- 2025Program Synthesis Dialog Agents for Interactive Decision-Making26 Feb 2025
- 2024Retrieval-Augmented Code Generation for Situated Action Generation: A Case Study on Minecraft25 Jun 2024
- 2024Can LLM Graph Reasoning Generalize beyond Pattern Memorization?23 Jun 2024
- 2024BigCodeBench: Benchmarking Code Generation with Diverse Function Calls and Complex Instructions22 Jun 2024