Analysis of Optimality of Large Language Models on Planning Problems
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Classic AI planning problems have been revisited in the Large Language Model (LLM) era, with a focus of recent benchmarks on success rates rather than plan efficiency. We examine the degree to which frontier models reason optimally versus relying on simple, heuristic, and possibly inefficient strategies. We focus on the Blocksworld domain involving towers of labeled blocks which have to be moved from an initial to a goal configuration via a set of primitive actions. We also study a formally equivalent task, the generalized Path-Star (P^*) graph, in order to isolate true topological reasoning from semantic priors. We systematically manipulate problem depth (the height of block towers), width (the number of towers), and compositionality (the number of goal blocks). Reasoning-enhanced LLMs significantly outperform traditional satisficing planners (e.g., LAMA) in complex, multi-goal configurations. Although classical search algorithms hit a wall as the search space expands, LLMs track theoretical optimality limits with near-perfect precision, even when domain-specific semantic hints are stripped away. To explain these surprising findings, we consider (and find evidence to support) two hypotheses: an active Algorithmic Simulation executed via reasoning tokens and a Geometric Memory that allows models to represent the P^* topology as a navigable global geometry, effectively bypassing exponential combinatorial complexity.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 13 of its 25 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 3 Apr 2026.
Builds on
13 of 25 references.
References · 13
- 2024Scaling LLM Test-Time Compute Optimally can be More Effective than Scaling Model Parameterscited by 1,986
- 2023On the Planning Abilities of Large Language Models : A Critical Investigationcited by 312
- 2024LLMs Can't Plan, But Can Help Planning in LLM-Modulo Frameworkscited by 179
- 2024The pitfalls of next-token predictioncited by 160
- 2024Beyond A*: Better Planning with Transformers via Search Dynamics Bootstrappingcited by 90
- 2014The LAMA Planner: Guiding Cost-Based Anytime Planning with Landmarkscited by 87
- 2023On the Planning Abilities of Large Language Models (A Critical Investigation with a Proposed Benchmark)cited by 85
- 2025The Serial Scaling Hypothesiscited by 13
- 2025Deep sequence models tend to memorize geometrically; it is unclear whycited by 9
- 2025Improving Large Language Model Planning with Action Sequence Similaritycited by 7
- 2025Frontier Large Language Models Rival State-of-the-Art Plannerscited by 7
- 2025Enhancing LLM Planning Capabilities through Intrinsic Self-Critiquecited by 7
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2024Thought of Search: Planning with Language Models Through The Lens of Efficiency
- 2023Can LLMs Fix Issues with Reasoning Models? Towards More Likely Models for AI Planning
- 2024Query-Efficient Planning with Language Models
- 2024Exploring and Benchmarking the Planning Capabilities of Large Language Models
- 2024Thinking Forward and Backward: Effective Backward Planning with Large Language Models
- 2026SokoBench: Evaluating Long-Horizon Planning and Reasoning in Large Language Models
- 2023Improving Planning with Large Language Models: A Modular Agentic Architecture
- 2026Extracting Search Trees from LLM Reasoning Traces Reveals Myopic Planning