Automated Theorem Provers Help Improve Large Language Model Reasoning

Read original: arXiv:2408.03492 - Published 8/9/2024 by Lachlan McGinness, Peter Baumgartner
Total Score

0

Automated Theorem Provers Help Improve Large Language Model Reasoning

Sign in to get full access

or

If you already have an account, we'll log you in

Overview

  • This paper explores how automated theorem provers can help improve the reasoning capabilities of large language models.
  • It provides a technical explanation of the research and a critical analysis of the approach.
  • The key insights and potential implications of the work are discussed.

Plain English Explanation

Automated theorem provers are computer programs that can automatically prove or disprove mathematical statements. In this research, the authors investigate how these theorem provers can be used to enhance the reasoning abilities of large language models - AI systems that are trained on vast amounts of text data to understand and generate human-like language.

The introduction provides background on the challenges of getting large language models to reason logically and how automated theorem provers could help address this.

The key idea is to use theorem provers to verify the logical consistency of the inferences made by large language models. This can help ensure the models are drawing valid conclusions and not making illogical leaps. The authors explore different ways of integrating theorem provers with large language models to boost their reasoning capabilities.

The technical explanation goes into more detail on the specific approaches explored in the paper, including translating natural language problems into logical representations that can be processed by theorem provers.

The critical analysis section discusses some of the limitations and challenges of this approach, such as the difficulty of translating between natural language and formal logic. The authors also note that further research is needed to fully integrate theorem provers into large language models in a scalable and robust way.

Overall, the paper suggests that automated theorem provers have significant potential to improve the logical reasoning abilities of large language models, which could lead to more trustworthy and reliable AI systems.

Technical Explanation

The paper begins by highlighting the challenges of getting large language models to reason logically and draw valid conclusions, beyond just generating human-like text. The authors propose that integrating automated theorem provers could help address this issue.

The authors explore different approaches for combining theorem provers with large language models. One key technique is translating natural language problems into formal logical representations that can be processed by theorem provers. This allows the models to verify the logical consistency of their inferences.

The paper also discusses other ways of leveraging theorem provers, such as using them to generate training data for large language models or to provide post-hoc verification of the models' outputs. Experiments are described that demonstrate the potential benefits of these methods.

The results suggest that incorporating theorem provers can significantly improve the logical reasoning capabilities of large language models on a variety of benchmark tasks. The authors hypothesize that this is because the theorem provers help the models better understand and apply logical principles.

Critical Analysis

The paper acknowledges some key limitations and challenges of this approach. Translating between natural language and formal logic is a notoriously difficult problem, and the authors note that more research is needed to make this translation robust and scalable.

There are also open questions around how best to integrate theorem provers with large language models in a way that is efficient and does not degrade the models' language understanding capabilities. The authors suggest that further experimentation is required to fully optimize this integration.

Additionally, the paper does not delve into potential biases or security risks that could arise from relying too heavily on theorem provers to validate the outputs of large language models. These are important considerations that warrant further exploration.

Overall, the research presented in the paper is a promising step towards enhancing the logical reasoning abilities of large language models. However, significant challenges remain before this approach can be reliably deployed in real-world AI systems.

Conclusion

This paper demonstrates that automated theorem provers have significant potential to improve the reasoning capabilities of large language models. By verifying the logical consistency of the models' inferences, theorem provers can help ensure the models are drawing valid conclusions.

The technical approaches explored in the paper, such as translating natural language problems into logical representations, show promising results on benchmark tasks. However, the authors acknowledge that substantial further research is needed to fully integrate theorem provers with large language models in a scalable and robust way.

Nonetheless, this work represents an important step towards developing more trustworthy and reliable AI systems that can engage in logical reasoning beyond just generating human-like text. As large language models continue to advance, techniques like those described in this paper will be crucial for ensuring their outputs are grounded in sound logical principles.



This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!

Follow @aimodelsfyi on 𝕏 →

Related Papers

Automated Theorem Provers Help Improve Large Language Model Reasoning
Total Score

0

Automated Theorem Provers Help Improve Large Language Model Reasoning

Lachlan McGinness, Peter Baumgartner

In this paper we demonstrate how logic programming systems and Automated first-order logic Theorem Provers (ATPs) can improve the accuracy of Large Language Models (LLMs) for logical reasoning tasks where the baseline performance is given by direct LLM solutions. We first evaluate LLM reasoning on steamroller problems using the PRONTOQA benchmark. We show how accuracy can be improved with a neuro-symbolic architecture where the LLM acts solely as a front-end for translating a given problem into a formal logic language and an automated reasoning engine is called for solving it. However, this approach critically hinges on the correctness of the LLM translation. To assess this translation correctness, we secondly define a framework of syntactic and semantic error categories. We implemented the framework and used it to identify errors that LLMs make in the benchmark domain. Based on these findings, we thirdly extended our method with capabilities for automatically correcting syntactic and semantic errors. For semantic error correction we integrate first-order logic ATPs, which is our main and novel contribution. We demonstrate that this approach reduces semantic errors significantly and further increases the accurracy of LLM logical reasoning.

Read more

8/9/2024

Steamroller Problems: An Evaluation of LLM Reasoning Capability with Automated Theorem Prover Strategies
Total Score

0

Steamroller Problems: An Evaluation of LLM Reasoning Capability with Automated Theorem Prover Strategies

Lachlan McGinness, Peter Baumgartner

This study presents the first examination of the ability of Large Language Models (LLMs) to follow reasoning strategies that are used to guide Automated Theorem Provers (ATPs). We evaluate the performance of GPT4, GPT3.5 Turbo and Google's recent Gemini model on problems from a steamroller domain. In addition to determining accuracy we make use of the Natural Language Processing library spaCy to explore new methods of investigating LLM's reasoning capabilities. This led to one alarming result, the low correlation between correct reasoning and correct answers for any of the tested models. We found that the models' performance when using the ATP reasoning strategies was comparable to one-shot chain of thought and observe that attention to uncertainty in the accuracy results is critical when drawing conclusions about model performance. Consistent with previous speculation we confirm that LLMs have a preference for, and are best able to follow, bottom up reasoning processes. However, the reasoning strategies can still be beneficial for deriving small and relevant sets of formulas for external processing by a trusted inference engine.

Read more

7/31/2024

📊

Total Score

0

Solving Quantified Modal Logic Problems by Translation to Classical Logics

Alexander Steen, Geoff Sutcliffe, Christoph Benzmuller

This article describes an evaluation of Automated Theorem Proving (ATP) systems on problems taken from the QMLTP library of first-order modal logic problems. Principally, the problems are translated to both typed first-order and higher-order logic in the TPTP language using an embedding approach, and solved using first-order resp. higher-order logic ATP systems and model finders. Additionally, the results from native modal logic ATP systems are considered, and compared with the results from the embedding approach. The findings are that the embedding process is reliable and successful when state-of-the-art ATP systems are used as backend reasoners, The first-order and higher-order embeddings perform similarly, native modal logic ATP systems have comparable performance to classical systems using the embedding for proving theorems, native modal logic ATP systems are outperformed by the embedding approach for disproving conjectures, and the embedding approach can cope with a wider range of modal logics than the native modal systems considered.

Read more

4/30/2024

Lemur: Integrating Large Language Models in Automated Program Verification
Total Score

0

Lemur: Integrating Large Language Models in Automated Program Verification

Haoze Wu, Clark Barrett, Nina Narodytska

The demonstrated code-understanding capability of LLMs raises the question of whether they can be used for automated program verification, a task that demands high-level abstract reasoning about program properties that is challenging for verification tools. We propose a general methodology to combine the power of LLMs and automated reasoners for automated program verification. We formally describe this methodology as a set of transition rules and prove its soundness. We instantiate the calculus as a sound automated verification procedure and demonstrate practical improvements on a set of synthetic and competition benchmarks.

Read more

4/26/2024