What Makes a Good Symbol for Hybrid Discrete-Continuous Planning?
The physical world has continuous state and action spaces, yet robot planning often benefits from hybrid discrete-continuous formulations that explicitly expose combinatorial structure, such as contact modes or discrete primitive actions. Existing methods typically rely on human-defined symbol sets or symbols derived from language supervision, without asking what makes a symbol computationally useful. In this paper, we take an inference-algorithm--centric view to define usefulness: a good symbol should expose the discrete commitments that simplify solving the original planning problem. We first introduce the concept of solver-sufficient symbolization by studying finite-horizon piecewise-affi
| Authors | Yiyuan Pan, Changliu Liu, Jiayuan Mao |
|---|---|
| Primary category | |
| Published | 16 October 2026 |
| Last updated at source | — |
Silytics shows public metadata from arXiv and links to the original. Information may be incomplete or out of date. Last refreshed 21 October 2026. Licenses and terms of the original apply to the work itself. Not financial, legal or professional advice.