Track papers across labs, topics, and trends.
Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
The authors investigate why LLMs struggle with symbolic retrosynthesis planning, identifying that direct SMILES-to-PDDL translation forces models to simultaneously resolve chemical logic and formal syntactic constraints. By decomposing the planning process into discrete stages of molecule mapping, reaction mapping, and PDDL generation, their approach achieves high translation success where end-to-end baselines fail. These results indicate that symbolic reasoning bottlenecks in scientific domains often stem from representation alignment issues rather than insufficient model capacity.
LLMs fail at chemical planning not from deficient reasoning capacity, but from an acute representation alignment bottleneck that disappears when structured through intermediate molecule and reaction abstractions.
While LLMs show promise in general reasoning, symbolic planning in chemistry remains a bottleneck. Direct ''SMILES-to-PDDL'' attempts fail because they force models to juggle chemical analysis and planning-language structuring simultaneously. We hypothesize that this failure stems from a lack of intermediate abstractions rather than insufficient model capacity. By decomposing retrosynthesis into molecule mapping, reaction mapping, and PDDL generation, we achieve high success rates where end-to-end approaches fail. This provides evidence that a primary bottleneck lies in representation alignment rather than raw model capacity. Our structural analysis demonstrates that intermediate representations are essential in retrosynthesis planning, highlighting the importance of representation-centric design in future systems.