| --- |
| license: cc-by-sa-4.0 |
| language: |
| - en |
| task_categories: |
| - text-classification |
| - reinforcement-learning |
| tags: |
| - process-reward-models |
| - prm |
| - reasoning |
| - chain-of-thought |
| - planning |
| - pddl |
| - step-level-supervision |
| - synthetic-data |
| - logical-reasoning |
| - reward-modeling |
| pretty_name: PDDL2PRM |
| size_categories: |
| - 100K<n<1M |
| --- |
| |
| # PDDL2PRM: Planning-Based Step-Level Supervision for Process Reward Models |
|
|
| **PDDL2PRM** is a large-scale dataset for training and evaluating **Process Reward Models (PRMs)** with fine-grained, step-level supervision derived from symbolic planning problems. |
|
|
| Unlike many PRM datasets that rely on human annotation, LLM judges, or final-answer correctness, PDDL2PRM uses **Planning Domain Definition Language (PDDL)** problems to generate structured reasoning trajectories whose intermediate steps can be evaluated automatically. Each reasoning step is assigned a scalar reward according to rule-based criteria that reflect whether the corresponding action is executable, goal-preserving, efficient, and optimal. |
|
|
| The dataset is introduced in: |
|
|
| **Process Reward Models Meet Planning: Generating Precise and Scalable Datasets for Step-Level Rewards** |
| Raffaele Pisano and Roberto Navigli, ACL 2026 |
|
|
| 🔗 **Project page & paper:** https://babelscape.github.io/prm-meets-planning/ |
| 📄 **arXiv:** https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.17957 |
|
|
| --- |
|
|
| ## Why PDDL2PRM? |
|
|
| Process Reward Models aim to evaluate reasoning **step by step**, rather than judging only the final answer. This is crucial because language models can produce a correct final answer while still making invalid, inconsistent, or unsupported intermediate reasoning steps (Turpin et al., 2023; Lightman et al., 2024; Zheng et al., 2025; Molfese et al., 2026). |
|
|
| However, high-quality step-level supervision is difficult to obtain: |
| - manual annotation is expensive and hard to scale; |
| - LLM-based annotation can be noisy and computationally costly; |
| - many existing PRM datasets focus primarily on mathematics; |
| - binary or coarse labels provide limited information about *how* a reasoning step fails. |
|
|
| PDDL2PRM addresses these limitations by using planning problems as a source of **precise, scalable, and reproducible supervision**. In PDDL, states, actions, preconditions, effects, and goals are explicitly defined, making it possible to assign rewards to reasoning steps using deterministic rules rather than subjective annotation. |
|
|
| --- |
|
|
| ## Dataset Overview |
|
|
| PDDL2PRM contains: |
|
|
| | Statistic | Value | |
| |---|---:| |
| | Reasoning steps | **984,974** | |
| | Planning problems | **14,714** | |
| | Domains | **11** | |
| | Reward levels | **5** | |
| | Mean optimal plan length | **7.94** | |
|
|
| Each example consists of a planning problem expressed in natural language, a partial reasoning trajectory, and a reward assigned to an intermediate step. |
|
|
| The dataset covers a diverse set of planning domains, including object manipulation, transportation, navigation, puzzles, and constraint-satisfaction tasks. |
|
|
| --- |
|
|
| ## Domains |
|
|
| PDDL2PRM includes 11 planning domains: |
|
|
| | Domain | Problems | Total Steps | |
| |---|---:|---:| |
| | BlocksWorld-3 | 952 | 51,990 | |
| | BlocksWorld-4 | 1,796 | 125,402 | |
| | Ferry | 858 | 65,269 | |
| | Hanoi | 1,660 | 65,745 | |
| | Logistics | 669 | 70,238 | |
| | Elevator | 2,089 | 207,549 | |
| | N-Puzzle | 598 | 42,027 | |
| | Rooms | 916 | 37,947 | |
| | Sokoban | 437 | 58,475 | |
| | Spanner | 3,563 | 198,942 | |
| | VisitGrid | 1,176 | 61,390 | |
| | **Total** | **14,714** | **984,974** | |
|
|
| The domains are grouped into broad reasoning families: |
| - **Manipulation and rearrangement:** BlocksWorld variants. |
| - **Transportation:** Ferry, Logistics, Elevator. |
| - **Puzzles and constraints:** Tower of Hanoi, N-Puzzle. |
| - **Navigation and exploration:** VisitGrid, Sokoban, Rooms, Spanner. |
|
|
| --- |
|
|
| ## Reward Signal |
|
|
| Each reasoning step is assigned one of five scalar rewards: |
|
|
| | Reward | Label | Meaning | |
| |---:|---|---| |
| | **0.0** | Non-executable | The action cannot be applied because its preconditions are not satisfied. | |
| | **0.25** | Dead-end | The action leads to a state from which the goal is unreachable. | |
| | **0.5** | Backtracking | The action leads to a state from which an optimal plan requires revisiting a previous state. | |
| | **0.75** | Suboptimal | The action is valid but does not belong to any optimal plan. | |
| | **1.0** | Optimal | The action belongs to at least one optimal plan from the current state. | |
|
|
| This reward structure provides more information than binary correct/incorrect supervision. It distinguishes between different types of flawed reasoning, including invalid actions, irreversible mistakes, inefficient detours, and merely suboptimal decisions. |
|
|
| --- |
|
|
| ## How the Dataset Was Generated |
|
|
| PDDL2PRM is generated from symbolic planning problems through the following pipeline: |
|
|
| 1. **Parse PDDL domains and problems.** |
| Planning instances define states, actions, preconditions, effects, initial states, and goals. |
|
|
| 2. **Sample candidate actions at each state.** |
| For each state along a trajectory, multiple candidate actions are considered, including valid, invalid, suboptimal, and optimal actions. |
|
|
| 3. **Evaluate each action with planning-based rules.** |
| Actions are labeled according to executability, reachability of the goal, backtracking behavior, and membership in an optimal plan. |
|
|
| 4. **Translate actions into natural language reasoning steps.** |
| Each symbolic action is converted into a natural-language reasoning step and paired with its scalar reward. |
|
|
| 5. **Continue until the goal is reached.** |
| The procedure produces both correct and incorrect reasoning trajectories, enabling PRMs to learn fine-grained distinctions between different reasoning behaviors. |
|
|
| --- |
|
|
| ## Key Findings from the Paper |
|
|
| Training with PDDL2PRM improves PRM robustness and generalization. |
|
|
| In the paper, PRMs trained on datasets augmented with PDDL-derived supervision outperform comparable models trained without the PDDL component. Improvements are especially strong on non-mathematical and planning-based reasoning benchmarks. |
|
|
| The results suggest that planning-derived supervision helps PRMs detect not only local execution errors, but also deeper modeling errors such as invalid assumptions, inappropriate reductions, and unjustified constraints. |
|
|
| --- |
|
|
| ## Dataset Card Note |
|
|
| PDDL2PRM is released under the **CC BY-SA 4.0** license. |
|
|
| Because the dataset is derived from symbolic planning problems and template-based natural-language translations, users should consider it a high-precision source of structured reasoning supervision rather than a replacement for naturally occurring Chain-of-Thought data. |
|
|
| --- |
|
|
| ## Citation |
|
|
| If you use PDDL2PRM, please cite: |
|
|
| ```bibtex |
| @inproceedings{prmsmeetplanning2026, |
| title={Process Reward Models Meet Planning: Generating Precise and Scalable Datasets for Step-Level Rewards}, |
| author={Pisano, Raffaele and Navigli, Roberto}, |
| booktitle={Proceedings of ACL 2026}, |
| year={2026} |
| } |
| |