arxiv: 2604.20601 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-22 · 💻 cs.AI · cs.CL

Recognition: unknown

Self-Guided Plan Extraction for Instruction-Following Tasks with Goal-Conditional Reinforcement Learning

Aleksandr Panov, Alexey Skrynnik, Dmitriy Lukashevskiy, Nikita Sorokin, Zoya Volovikova

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 00:00 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.AI cs.CL

keywords instruction followingreinforcement learninglanguage modelsplan generationco-traininggoal-conditional RLgeneralizationself-guided learning

0 comments

The pith

A co-training loop lets a language model and RL agent jointly improve plans for following instructions without manual labels.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper introduces a framework that lets a language model create high-level plans for tasks described in natural language and then refine those plans using performance feedback from a reinforcement learning agent. The agent trains on the current plans while the model updates them based on how well the agent succeeds and on preference signals, forming repeated cycles of mutual improvement. This matters because typical instruction-following systems depend on humans to break tasks into fixed subtasks or to prepare large annotated datasets in advance. A sympathetic reader would care if the loop can produce agents that stick more closely to given instructions and handle commands they have never seen before. The approach is evaluated in environments that include unpredictable changes and stochastic elements.

Core claim

SuperIgor uses iterative co-training in which an RL agent learns to follow plans generated by a language model, and the language model then adapts those plans based on the agent's feedback and preferences. This mutual improvement process allows the system to produce effective high-level plans without predefined subtasks or manual annotation, leading to agents that adhere more strictly to given instructions and generalize better to unseen ones in stochastic environments.

What carries the argument

The iterative co-training loop in which the goal-conditional RL agent executes language-model plans and supplies feedback that lets the model revise the plans.

If this is right

Agents trained under this loop adhere to instructions more strictly than those trained with baseline methods.
The resulting agents generalize effectively to previously unseen instructions.
High-level plans can be generated and refined without requiring manual dataset annotation or predefined subtasks.
The framework operates successfully in environments that contain rich dynamics and stochasticity.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

The same feedback-driven refinement might be applied to other planning domains where execution outcomes can be observed directly.
Reducing reliance on labeled data could make instruction-following systems easier to deploy in new environments.
Longer training loops might reveal whether the improvements continue or plateau after several rounds of co-training.

Load-bearing premise

The iterative co-training loop between the RL agent and language model produces reliable improvements in plan quality without external supervision or manual annotation.

What would settle it

Running SuperIgor agents and baseline agents side by side in the same stochastic environments and finding no measurable gain in instruction adherence or generalization to new instructions would show the claimed advantage does not hold.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.20601 by Aleksandr Panov, Alexey Skrynnik, Dmitriy Lukashevskiy, Nikita Sorokin, Zoya Volovikova.

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: Super Igor Pipeline: The pipeline consists of four stages: (1) a language model generates multiple plan [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: Comparison of SuperIgor and baseline performance on CrafText tasks (Atomic / Combo / New Objects [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: A comparative analysis of the number of mastered subtasks over 10 billion environment steps. and testing setups and remains relatively stable when moving to unseen goals. b) Plan reprioritization under DPO illustrates the process by which language models are incrementally grounded in the agent’s behavior and the underlying environment mechanics.. The reranking visualization (Appendix E, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE… view at source ↗

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Training plans generation Algorithm 4 Final Plan Generation from Ontology Require: Instruction I, goals mapping G, goals plan P, ontology G = (V, E) Ensure: Final plan P 1: Retrieve goal subtasks: S ← G[I] 2: Initialize plan vertex set: U ← S 3: for each s ∈ S do 4: Expand prerequisites via ontology: D ← PREREQCLOSURE(s, G) 5: U ← U ∪ D 6: end for 7: Extract induced subgraph: GU ← G[U] 8: Topologically sor… view at source ↗

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: Ablation of the skill-mastery threshold τ . The plot shows evaluation scores on the Atomic and Combo tasks during training for different τ values. Combo setting. This trend holds even for reasoningoriented models such as QWQ-32B, indicating that improvements in single-step reasoning do not directly translate to effective long-horizon planning. In contrast, the RL-trained SuperIgor agent maintains substa… view at source ↗

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: Coverage of reference subtasks (out of 23) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_7.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 8.** Figure 8: Example of instructions and corresponding [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_8.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 9.** Figure 9: Example of DPO plan reprioritization for the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_9.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 10.** Figure 10: Example of how the agent follows the plan and chooses actions. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_10.png] view at source ↗

read the original abstract

We introduce SuperIgor, a framework for instruction-following tasks. Unlike prior methods that rely on predefined subtasks, SuperIgor enables a language model to generate and refine high-level plans through a self-learning mechanism, reducing the need for manual dataset annotation. Our approach involves iterative co-training: an RL agent is trained to follow the generated plans, while the language model adapts and modifies these plans based on RL feedback and preferences. This creates a feedback loop where both the agent and the planner improve jointly. We validate our framework in environments with rich dynamics and stochasticity. Results show that SuperIgor agents adhere to instructions more strictly than baseline methods, while also demonstrating strong generalization to previously unseen instructions.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

SuperIgor's co-training loop claims to cut annotation needs for instruction-following agents, but the feedback risks letting the LM settle on plans that are merely easy for the current policy rather than genuinely better.

read the letter

The paper introduces SuperIgor as a closed-loop system where a goal-conditional RL agent follows plans from a language model, then supplies feedback so the LM can adapt those plans over iterations. The core pitch is that this self-guided process improves strict instruction adherence and generalization to unseen instructions in stochastic environments, all without relying on manually annotated datasets or predefined subtasks. That reduction in labeling effort is the practical angle worth noting first. The setup is new in its explicit joint training of the planner and the executor through RL-derived preferences, rather than one-way use of an LM for planning. It does a reasonable job laying out the motivation for scalable agents in rich dynamics and reports comparative gains over baselines on adherence and transfer. Those elements give the work a clear target problem and a concrete mechanism to discuss. The main soft spot sits in the loop's soundness. If the underlying reward is driven primarily by task completion, the LM can converge to short or degenerate plans that the policy happens to execute reliably, without any real gain in plan quality or robustness. The abstract mentions preferences but gives no sign of an auxiliary plan-fidelity term, a held-out evaluator, or ablations that isolate the LM update from policy improvements. In stochastic settings this leaves open the possibility that reported gains are partly circular. Experiments would need to show plan complexity trends, statistical tests against strong baselines, and controls that turn off the co-training to confirm the loop is doing the work. Readers working on hybrid RL-LM agents for instruction following would find the framework useful as a starting point, even if they end up adding external grounding or different reward shaping. The idea engages honestly with the annotation bottleneck, so it has enough substance for a serious referee to evaluate the experimental controls and loop stability. I would recommend sending it to peer review rather than a desk reject.

Referee Report

3 major / 0 minor

Summary. The manuscript introduces SuperIgor, a framework for instruction-following tasks in which a language model generates and iteratively refines high-level plans via a self-guided co-training loop with a goal-conditional RL agent. The RL agent is trained to execute the LM-generated plans while supplying feedback and preferences that allow the LM to adapt the plans, reducing reliance on manual annotation. The authors claim that the resulting agents adhere more strictly to instructions than baselines and generalize better to previously unseen instructions in environments with rich dynamics and stochasticity.

Significance. If the central claims hold, the work would demonstrate a viable path toward annotation-light instruction following by closing the loop between plan generation and execution feedback. The joint improvement of planner and policy is a potentially useful direction for scaling RL-LM hybrids in stochastic settings.

major comments (3)

[Abstract] Abstract: the claims of stricter instruction adherence and strong generalization to unseen instructions are asserted without any reported metrics, baselines, statistical tests, error bars, or ablation results, so it is impossible to evaluate whether the improvements are load-bearing or merely apparent.
[Method] Method description of the co-training loop: the manuscript does not specify whether the RL reward contains an auxiliary term for plan fidelity, coverage, or preference alignment beyond raw task completion. Without such a term (or a held-out preference model), the feedback loop risks rewarding short or degenerate plans that the current policy can execute easily rather than genuinely higher-quality plans, undermining the self-improvement claim.
[Experiments] Experimental validation section: no details are supplied on environment stochasticity levels, number of trials, how 'unseen instructions' were constructed, or how plan quality was measured independently of task success, making it impossible to assess whether reported gains reflect true generalization or training-loop artifacts.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive feedback on our manuscript. We address each major comment below and have revised the manuscript to provide the requested clarifications and details.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the claims of stricter instruction adherence and strong generalization to unseen instructions are asserted without any reported metrics, baselines, statistical tests, error bars, or ablation results, so it is impossible to evaluate whether the improvements are load-bearing or merely apparent.

Authors: We agree that the abstract, being a high-level summary, does not include quantitative metrics. The full manuscript reports these results in the Experiments section, including baseline comparisons, adherence and generalization metrics, and statistical details. In the revision, we have updated the abstract to concisely reference the key quantitative improvements (e.g., adherence rates and generalization gains) while preserving brevity. All claims remain grounded in the reported experiments. revision: yes
Referee: [Method] Method description of the co-training loop: the manuscript does not specify whether the RL reward contains an auxiliary term for plan fidelity, coverage, or preference alignment beyond raw task completion. Without such a term (or a held-out preference model), the feedback loop risks rewarding short or degenerate plans that the current policy can execute easily rather than genuinely higher-quality plans, undermining the self-improvement claim.

Authors: This is a valid concern. The original description focused on the goal-conditional reward for task completion, with LM adaptation driven by RL-derived preferences. We have revised the Method section to explicitly define the reward function, adding an auxiliary term for plan fidelity and coverage derived from the preference signals. This term penalizes degenerate plans and encourages alignment with high-quality plans. We have also added pseudocode and a diagram of the co-training loop for clarity. revision: yes
Referee: [Experiments] Experimental validation section: no details are supplied on environment stochasticity levels, number of trials, how 'unseen instructions' were constructed, or how plan quality was measured independently of task success, making it impossible to assess whether reported gains reflect true generalization or training-loop artifacts.

Authors: We acknowledge that additional experimental details are needed for reproducibility and assessment. The revised Experiments section now specifies the stochasticity levels (e.g., transition noise parameters), number of trials with error bars across random seeds, the construction of unseen instructions (novel goal-constraint combinations held out from training), and independent plan quality metrics (coverage and fidelity scores computed separately from task success). We have included ablations confirming that gains arise from the co-training loop rather than artifacts. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity detected

full rationale

The paper presents SuperIgor as an iterative co-training framework in which an RL agent follows LM-generated plans and supplies feedback for plan refinement. The reported gains in instruction adherence and generalization to unseen instructions are framed as empirical outcomes from this joint process, benchmarked against baselines in stochastic environments. No equations, parameter fits, or self-citations are exhibited in the provided text that reduce the performance claims to the training loop by construction; the loop is offered as a method whose effectiveness is measured externally rather than presupposed. The derivation therefore remains self-contained against the stated validation.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract supplies no information on free parameters, background axioms, or newly postulated entities.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5434 in / 997 out tokens · 35293 ms · 2026-05-10T00:00:43.076349+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

45 extracted references · 9 canonical work pages

[1]

arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.12037 , year=

Minedreamer: Learning to follow instructions via chain-of-imagination for simulated-world control , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.12037 , year=

work page arXiv
[2]

Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , volume=

Minedojo: Building open-ended embodied agents with internet-scale knowledge , author=. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , volume=
[3]

Proceedings of ECAI 2024, the 27th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence , series=

Instruction Following with Goal-Conditioned Reinforcement Learning in Virtual Environments , author=. Proceedings of ECAI 2024, the 27th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence , series=. 2024 , doi=

2024
[4]

Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , volume=

Video pretraining (vpt): Learning to act by watching unlabeled online videos , author=. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , volume=
[5]

Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , volume=

Steve-1: A generative model for text-to-behavior in minecraft , author=. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , volume=
[6]

2025 , doi=

Li, Muyao and Wang, Zihao and He, Kaichen and Ma, Xiaojian and Liang, Yitao , booktitle=. 2025 , doi=

2025
[7]

Sawyer, Daniel Slater, David Reichert, Davide Vercelli, Demis Hassabis, Drew A

SIMA 2: A Generalist Embodied Agent for Virtual Worlds , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.04797 , year=

work page arXiv
[8]

International Conference on Learning Representations , year=

Grounded Language Learning Fast and Slow , author=. International Conference on Learning Representations , year=
[9]

Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , volume=

STEVE-1: A Generative Model for Text-to-Behavior in Minecraft , author=. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , volume=. 2023 , url=

2023
[10]

Foundation Models for Decision Making Workshop at NeurIPS 2023 , year=

Skill Reinforcement Learning and Planning for Open-World Long-Horizon Tasks , author=. Foundation Models for Decision Making Workshop at NeurIPS 2023 , year=

2023
[11]

Ghost in the minecraft: Generally capable agents for open-world enviroments via large language mod- els with text-based knowledge and memory

Ghost in the minecraft: Generally capable agents for open-world environments via large language models with text-based knowledge and memory , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.17144 , year=

work page arXiv
[12]

International Conference on Learning Representations , year=

GROOT: Learning to Follow Instructions by Watching Gameplay Videos , author=. International Conference on Learning Representations , year=
[13]

Forty-second International Conference on Machine Learning , year=

Founder: Grounding foundation models in world models for open-ended embodied decision making , author=. Forty-second International Conference on Machine Learning , year=
[14]

Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages=

Alfred: A benchmark for interpreting grounded instructions for everyday tasks , author=. Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages=
[15]

Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , volume=

SILG: The Multi-environment Symbolic Interactive Language Grounding Benchmark , author=. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , volume=. 2021 , url=

2021
[16]

C raf T ext Benchmark: Advancing Instruction Following in Complex Multimodal Open-Ended World

Volovikova, Zoya and Gorbov, Gregory and Kuderov, Petr and Panov, Aleksandr and Skrynnik, Alexey. C raf T ext Benchmark: Advancing Instruction Following in Complex Multimodal Open-Ended World. Proceedings of the 63rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers). 2025. doi:10.18653/v1/2025.acl-long.1267

work page doi:10.18653/v1/2025.acl-long.1267 2025
[17]

Manolis Savva and Jitendra Malik and Devi Parikh and Dhruv Batra and Abhishek Kadian and Oleksandr Maksymets and Yili Zhao and Erik Wijmans and Bhavana Jain and Julian Straub and Jia Liu and Vladlen Koltun , title =. 2019. 2019 , url =. doi:10.1109/ICCV.2019.00943 , timestamp =

work page doi:10.1109/iccv.2019.00943 2019
[18]

arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.23148 , year=

Adapting Interleaved Encoders with PPO for Language-Guided Reinforcement Learning in BabyAI , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.23148 , year=

work page arXiv
[19]

Advances in neural information processing systems , volume=

Direct preference optimization: Your language model is secretly a reward model , author=. Advances in neural information processing systems , volume=
[20]

2019 , eprint=

CraftAssist: A Framework for Dialogue-enabled Interactive Agents , author=. 2019 , eprint=

2019
[21]

Proceedings of the NeurIPS 2022 Competitions Track , pages =

Interactive Grounded Language Understanding in a Collaborative Environment: Retrospective on Iglu 2022 Competition , author =. Proceedings of the NeurIPS 2022 Competitions Track , pages =. 2022 , editor =

2022
[22]

Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pages=

Touchdown: Natural Language Navigation and Spatial Reasoning in Visual Street Environments , author=. Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pages=. 2019 , doi=

2019
[23]

Executing Instructions in Situated Collaborative Interactions , author=. Proceedings of the 2019 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing and the 9th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing (EMNLP-IJCNLP) , pages=. 2019 , doi=

2019
[24]

Proceedings of the 41st International Conference on Machine Learning , series=

Learning to Model the World With Language , author=. Proceedings of the 41st International Conference on Machine Learning , series=. 2024 , url=

2024
[25]

BabyAI: A platform to study the sample eﬃciency of grounded language learning

Babyai: A platform to study the sample efficiency of grounded language learning , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:1810.08272 , year=

work page arXiv
[26]

Proceedings of the 38th International Conference on Machine Learning , series=

Grounding Language to Entities and Dynamics for Generalization in Reinforcement Learning , author=. Proceedings of the 38th International Conference on Machine Learning , series=. 2021 , url=

2021
[27]

Proceedings of the AAAI conference on artificial intelligence , volume=

Film: Visual reasoning with a general conditioning layer , author=. Proceedings of the AAAI conference on artificial intelligence , volume=
[28]

Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , volume=

Detclip: Dictionary-enriched visual-concept paralleled pre-training for open-world detection , author=. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , volume=
[29]

Thirty-seventh Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems , year=

Semantic HELM: A Human-Readable Memory for Reinforcement Learning , author=. Thirty-seventh Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems , year=
[30]

IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters , pages=

Interactive Language: Talking to Robots in Real Time , author=. IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters , pages=. 2024 , month=. doi:10.1109/LRA.2023.3295255 , url=

work page doi:10.1109/lra.2023.3295255 2024
[31]

International Conference on Learning Representations , year=

RTFM: Generalising to New Environment Dynamics via Reading , author=. International Conference on Learning Representations , year=
[32]

EMNLP 2021 Workshop on Novel Ideas in Learning-to-Learn through Interaction , year=

Embodied BERT: A Transformer Model for Embodied, Language-guided Visual Task Completion , author=. EMNLP 2021 Workshop on Novel Ideas in Learning-to-Learn through Interaction , year=

2021
[33]

Nature , volume=

Mastering diverse control tasks through world models , author=. Nature , volume=. 2025 , doi=

2025
[34]

arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.03402 , year=

Game On: Towards Language Models as RL Experimenters , author=. arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.03402 , year=

work page arXiv
[35]

International Conference on Learning Representations , year=

Plan-Seq-Learn: Language Model Guided RL for Solving Long Horizon Robotics Tasks , author=. International Conference on Learning Representations , year=
[36]

International conference on machine learning , pages=

Language models as zero-shot planners: Extracting actionable knowledge for embodied agents , author=. International conference on machine learning , pages=. 2022 , organization=

2022
[37]

Proceedings of the 2022 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies , pages=

Few-shot Subgoal Planning with Language Models , author=. Proceedings of the 2022 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies , pages=

2022
[38]

Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems , pages=

Pragmatic Instruction Following and Goal Assistance via Cooperative Language-Guided Inverse Planning , author=. Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems , pages=. 2024 , doi=

2024
[39]

Proceedings of The 8th Conference on Robot Learning , series=

Autonomous Improvement of Instruction Following Skills via Foundation Models , author=. Proceedings of The 8th Conference on Robot Learning , series=. 2025 , url=

2025
[40]

Proceedings of The 6th Conference on Robot Learning , series=

Do As I Can, Not As I Say: Grounding Language in Robotic Affordances , author=. Proceedings of The 6th Conference on Robot Learning , series=. 2023 , url=

2023
[41]

and Bell, Peter and Storkey, Amos , booktitle=

Han, Dongge and McInroe, Trevor and Jelley, Adam and Albrecht, Stefano V. and Bell, Peter and Storkey, Amos , booktitle=. 2025 , url=

2025
[42]

Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2020 , pages=

Visually-Grounded Planning without Vision: Language Models Infer Detailed Plans from High-level Instructions , author=. Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2020 , pages=. 2020 , doi=

2020
[43]

Proceedings of the 2022 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing , pages=

DANLI: Deliberative Agent for Following Natural Language Instructions , author=. Proceedings of the 2022 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing , pages=. 2022 , doi=

2022
[44]

International Conference on Learning Representations , year=

True Knowledge Comes from Practice: Aligning Large Language Models with Embodied Environments via Reinforcement Learning , author=. International Conference on Learning Representations , year=
[45]

Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , volume=

Describe, Explain, Plan and Select: Interactive Planning with LLMs Enables Open-World Multi-Task Agents , author=. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , volume=. 2023 , url=

2023