To Move or Not to Move: Constraint-based Planning Enables Zero-Shot Generalization for Interactive Navigation
Abstract
Domain fit: AI-adjacent · Paper appears method- or tooling-adjacent to AI workflows with partial ecosystem coverage.
Visual navigation typically assumes the existence of at least one obstacle-free path between start and goal, which must be discovered/planned by the robot. However, in real-world scenarios, such as home environments and warehouses, clutter can block all routes. Targeted at such cases, we introduce the Lifelong Interactive Navigation problem, where a mobile robot with manipulation abilities can move clutter to forge its own path to complete sequential object- placement tasks - each involving placing an given object (eg. Alarm clock, Pillow) onto a target object (eg. Dining table, Desk, Bed). To address this lifelong setting - where effects of environment changes accumulate and have long-term effects - we propose an LLM-driven, constraint-based planning framework with active perception. Our framework allows the LLM to reason over a structured scene graph of discovered objects and obstacles, deciding which object to move, where to place it, and where to look next to discover task-relevant information. This coupling of reasoning and active perception allows the agent to explore the regions expected to contribute to task completion rather than exhaustively mapping the environment. A standard motion planner then executes the corresponding navigate-pick-place, or detour sequence, ensuring reliable low-level control. Evaluated in physics-enabled ProcTHOR-10k simulator, our approach outperforms non-learning and learning-based baselines. We further demonstrate our approach qualitatively on real-world hardware.
Results and benchmarks
Visual navigation typically assumes the existence of at least one obstacle-free path between start and goal, which must be discovered/planned by the robot.
Benchmark evidence is limited
Evidence graph: 2 refs, 1 links.
Utility signals: depth 60/100, grounding 58/100, status medium.
Implementation
No direct implementation yet
Maintained implementation evidence is not confirmed for this paper yet.
Use the implementation status and reproduction sections for the current action plan.
No verified maintained repo yet
There is no verified maintained implementation yet. Use this baseline plan to decide whether to prototype now or defer.
- No direct maintained implementation was found. Use the paper PDF and citation graph to design a baseline reproduction.
- Track assumptions and missing details in an experiment log before coding.
Time to first repro: a few days
Recommendation evidence is currently too limited for a maintained-repo choice. Use Implementation Status and Reproduction Path for a practical baseline plan.
- Estimate is based on paper-only reproduction flow
Reproduction readiness
No repo
No verified implementation available
- No maintained repository has been identified for this paper. Check adjacent implementations or HF artifacts below.
Hardware requirements
- Expect multi-day setup/compute for meaningful reproduction based on current guidance.
Validation caveat
Repositories and ecosystem
No additional verified repositories beyond the primary recommendation.
These repositories had low-confidence matching signals and are hidden by default.
- IDEAS-Lab-Purdue/CoReLIN
Confidence: Medium · 3 stars
Hugging Face artifacts
No trustworthy direct or curated related Hugging Face artifacts were found yet. Use targeted searches to quickly locate candidate models, datasets, and demos.
Datasets
Spaces
Tip: start with models, then check datasets and spaces if you need evaluation data or demos.
Research context
Tasks
Agentic tool use
Methods
Transformer
Domains
Large Language Models, AI Agents
Open this paper in HFEPX to review benchmark signals, evaluation modes, and human-feedback protocol context.
Open in HFEPXJump to Paper2Code search queries derived from this paper's research context.