Capability-Gated Planning: Cost-to-Goal Discovery and the Limits of Myopic Experiment Selection
Ahmed Hassoon, Mark Dredze
Abstract
Systems that automate scientific discovery must repeatedly decide which experiment to run, which hypothesis to test, which tool to build, and when to stop. Many systems make these decisions by maximizing a myopic score such as expected information gain per unit cost or a learned plausibility score. We identify a structural limitation of this approach. Some actions are constructive: they acquire an epistemic capability (an instrument, assay, pipeline, simulator, or abstraction) whose value lies not in the information returned immediately but in the future actions it makes available. When the least-cost route to a confident answer requires a chain of such constructions, a planner that scores actions only by information obtainable within a bounded horizon cannot value the first construction: it yields no information within the horizon and is dominated by any measurement with positive information, however small. We formulate goal-directed discovery as a stochastic shortest-path problem in belief space in which constructive experiments change the downstream action graph, and prove that for every lookahead depth d there is an instance on which every myopic information-maximizing planner has an unbounded approximation ratio, and a related instance on which it never reaches the goal. The mechanism is a capability-indistinguishability lemma: within the horizon, acquiring a capability can be observationally indistinguishable from paying for a null action. This establishes capability gating as a reachability axis of difficulty distinct from curvature (submodularity) and information order (adaptivity gaps). We introduce CG-Plan, an incremental replanner with a capability-aware cost-to-go heuristic h = hcap + hexp. In a controlled testbed, the performance gap appears only under gating, persists for every fixed horizon, and arises when near-miss hypotheses come from a data-consistent proposer.
Create a lesson
Related papers
How Model Growth, Recursion, and Boundary Operators Influence Scaling Exponents
Zixi Chen, Akshay Vegesna, Samip Dahal et al.
Evidence-Grounded Agentic Formulation Development in an Autonomous Laboratory
Michael M. Craig, Riley J. Hickman, Yingshan Ma et al.
Probabilistic Linear Explanations
Frederic Koriche, Jean-Marie Lagniez, Chi Tran
Double descent is the principle of least action
Congzhou M Sha
RLLBC-Lib: An Educational Code Library for Reinforcement Learning and Learning-Based Control
Bernd Frauenknecht, Emma Cramer, Artur Eisele et al.
Higher-order pruning of experts in mixture-of-experts language models
Alex M. Tseng, Prannay Kaul, Luca Zancato et al.