mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Linear Temporal Logic Translation via Human-Inspired Self-Constrained Reasoning for Robot Task Specification

arXiv 2608.28435 ↗First posted 28 Aug 2026cs.ROcited by 0

On the map: LLM reasoning → Spatial and embodied reasoning

Abstract (arXiv)

Many robotic tasks are temporally extended and demand precise specifications of subgoals, constraints, and their temporal ordering. Yet human operators typically communicate such tasks in natural language, which is inherently ambiguous, underspecified, and context dependent. Translating human instructions into formal task specifications, such as Linear Temporal Logic (LTL), is therefore essential for verifiable and safe robotic execution. Existing LLM-based translators attempt to bridge this gap through open-ended reasoning or post-hoc constraint enforcement, but the former may violate domain constraints, whereas the latter can disrupt the reasoning needed for novel instructions. This paper proposes Self-Constrained Reasoning (SCR), a framework that mitigates this trade-off by internalizing structural knowledge into the model's decision-making process rather than imposing it as an external filter. By combining a structural constraint representation with a hierarchical decision-making formulation, SCR guides reasoning within a formally grounded space while preserving adaptability to unseen instructions. Experiments show that SCR improves both domain-constraint satisfaction and generalization, providing an effective and interpretable approach for translating human intent into verifiable specifications for robotic execution.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Spatial and embodied reasoning, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 7 of its 76 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 28 Aug 2026.

Builds on

7 of 76 references.

References · 7

  1. 2025π0.5: a Vision-Language-Action Model with Open-World Generalizationcited by 1,653
  2. 2023Efficient Guided Generation for Large Language Modelscited by 192
  3. 2025Are Reasoning Models More Prone to Hallucination?cited by 62
  4. 2025Think Inside the JSON: Reinforcement Strategy for Strict LLM Schema Adherencecited by 16
  5. 2025ConformalNL2LTL: Translating Natural Language Instructions into Temporal Logic Formulas with Conformal Correctness Guaranteescited by 9
  6. 2026Thinking Before Constraining: A Unified Decoding Framework for Large Language Modelscited by 5
  7. 2026Hard Constraints Meet Soft Generation: Guaranteed Feasibility for LLM-based Combinatorial Optimizationcited by 3

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2023Plug in the Safety Chip: Enforcing Constraints for LLM-driven Robot Agents
  2. 2024Nl2Hltl2Plan: Scaling Up Natural Language Understanding for Multi-Robots Through Hierarchical Temporal Logic Task Representation
  3. 2025T3 Planner: A Self-Correcting LLM Framework for Robotic Motion Planning with Temporal Logic
  4. 2025VerifyLLM: LLM-Based Pre-Execution Task Plan Verification for Robots
  5. 2026hint2: Hierarchical World Models for Inference-Time Temporal Logic Guidance
  6. 2024SELP: Generating Safe and Efficient Task Plans for Robot Agents with Large Language Models
  7. 2025Combining Large Language Models and Symbolic Reasoning for Multi-Robot Temporal Planning through Explainable Knowledge Bases
  8. 2026One Word, Different Action: A Real-Robot Benchmark for Language-Conditioned Embodied Reasoning ↗