mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Counterfactual Reasoning in Automated Planning

arXiv 2605.02603 ↗First posted 4 May 2026cs.AIcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Automated planning traditionally assumes that all aspects of a planning task (initial state, goals, and available actions) are fully specified in advance, an approach well-suited to domains with fixed rules and deterministic execution. However, real-world planning often requires flexibility, allowing for deviations from the original task parameters in response to unforeseen circumstances or to improve outcomes. This paper surveys existing works on counterfactual reasoning in automated planning, categorizing them by what elements are changed, when the reasoning is triggered, and why and how these changes are made. We conclude by discussing key findings and outlining open research questions to guide future work in this area.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 4 of its 35 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 4 May 2026.

Builds on

4 of 35 references.

References · 4

  1. 2017Classical Planning in Deep Latent Space: Bridging the Subsymbolic-Symbolic Boundarycited by 58
  2. 2019Learning First-Order Symbolic Representations for Planning from the Structure of the State Spacecited by 38
  3. 2024On Learning Action Costs from Input Planscited by 3
  4. 2026Planning Task Shielding: Detecting and Repairing Flaws in Planning Tasks through Turning them Unsolvablecited by 1

Built on by

Not cited yet.