Abstract
Large Language Models (LLMs) have made significant strides in variousintelligent tasks but still struggle with complex action reasoning tasks thatrequire systematic search. To address this limitation, we propose a method thatbridges the natural language understanding capabilities of LLMs with thesymbolic reasoning strengths of action languages. Our approach, termed"LLM+AL," leverages the LLM's strengths in semantic parsing and commonsenseknowledge generation alongside the action language's proficiency in automatedreasoning based on encoded knowledge. We compare LLM+AL againststate-of-the-art LLMs, including ChatGPT-4, Claude 3 Opus, Gemini Ultra 1.0,and o1-preview, using benchmarks for complex reasoning about actions. Ourfindings indicate that, although all methods exhibit errors, LLM+AL, withrelatively minimal human corrections, consistently leads to correct answers,whereas standalone LLMs fail to improve even with human feedback. LLM+AL alsocontributes to automated generation of action languages.