LLM-guided Task and Motion Planning using Knowledge-based Reasoning
On the map: LLM reasoning → Spatial and embodied reasoning
Abstract (arXiv)
Performing complex manipulation tasks in dynamic environments requires efficient Task and Motion Planning (TAMP) approaches that combine high-level symbolic plans with low-level motion control. Advances in Large Language Models (LLMs), such as GPT-4, are transforming task planning by offering natural language as an intuitive and flexible way to describe tasks, generate symbolic plans, and reason. However, the effectiveness of LLM-based TAMP approaches is limited due to static and template-based prompting, which limits adaptability to dynamic environments and complex task contexts. To address these limitations, this work proposes a novel Onto-LLM-TAMP framework that employs knowledge-based reasoning to refine and expand user prompts with task-contextual reasoning and knowledge-based environment state descriptions. Integrating domain-specific knowledge into the prompt ensures semantically accurate and context-aware task plans. The proposed framework demonstrates its effectiveness by resolving semantic errors in symbolic plan generation, such as maintaining logical temporal goal ordering in scenarios involving hierarchical object placement. The proposed framework is validated through both simulation and real-world scenarios, demonstrating significant improvements over the baseline approach in terms of adaptability to dynamic environments and the generation of semantically correct task plans.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Spatial and embodied reasoning, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 17 of its 33 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 10 Dec 2024.
Builds on
17 of 33 references.
Closest ancestors · 2
Same direction, newest first
- 2024LLM3:Large Language Model-based Task and Motion Planning with Motion Failure Reasoning18 Mar
- 2023Task and Motion Planning with Large Language Models for Object Rearrangement10 Mar
Other references · 15
- 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,419
- 2023GPT-4 Technical Reportcited by 18,396
- 2023LLaMA: Open and Efficient Foundation Language Modelscited by 14,132
- 2022Do As I Can, Not As I Say: Grounding Language in Robotic Affordancescited by 2,348
- 2022Language Models as Zero-Shot Planners: Extracting Actionable Knowledge for Embodied Agentscited by 1,035
- 2023FoundationPose: Unified 6D Pose Estimation and Tracking of Novel Objectscited by 429
- 2023ChatGPT for Robotics: Design Principles and Model Abilitiescited by 299
- 2018PDDLStream: Integrating Symbolic Planners and Blackbox Samplers via Optimistic Adaptive Planningcited by 150
- 2023AutoTAMP: Autoregressive Task and Motion Planning with LLMs as Translators and Checkerscited by 113
- 2018Task Planning in Robotics: an Empirical Comparison of PDDL-based and ASP-based Systemscited by 40
- 2023RobotGPT: Robot Manipulation Learning from ChatGPTcited by 39
- 2023Interactive Task Planning with Language Modelscited by 37
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 1.
1 paper.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025A Systematic Study of Large Language Models for Task and Motion Planning With PDDLStream
- 2024Natural Language as Policies: Reasoning for Coordinate-Level Embodied Control with LLMs
- 2023Dynamic Planning with a LLM
- 2024Open-World Task and Motion Planning via Vision-Language Model Generated Constraints
- 2025Lang2Manip: A Tool for LLM-Based Symbolic-to-Geometric Planning for Manipulation
- 2026Hierarchical Prompting with Dual LLM Modules for Robotic Task and Motion Planning ↗
- 2025DEXTER-LLM: Dynamic and Explainable Coordination of Multi-Robot Systems in Unknown Environments via Large Language Models
- 2025Can LLM-Reasoning Models Replace Classical Planning? A Benchmark Study