Chain-of-Thought Reasoning Without Prompting
2402.10200
94
0
🌿
Abstract
In enhancing the reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs), prior research primarily focuses on specific prompting techniques such as few-shot or zero-shot chain-of-thought (CoT) prompting. These methods, while effective, often involve manually intensive prompt engineering. Our study takes a novel approach by asking: Can LLMs reason effectively without prompting? Our findings reveal that, intriguingly, CoT reasoning paths can be elicited from pre-trained LLMs by simply altering the textit{decoding} process. Rather than conventional greedy decoding, we investigate the top-$k$ alternative tokens, uncovering that CoT paths are frequently inherent in these sequences. This approach not only bypasses the confounders of prompting but also allows us to assess the LLMs' textit{intrinsic} reasoning abilities. Moreover, we observe that the presence of a CoT in the decoding path correlates with a higher confidence in the model's decoded answer. This confidence metric effectively differentiates between CoT and non-CoT paths. Extensive empirical studies on various reasoning benchmarks show that the proposed CoT-decoding effectively elicits reasoning capabilities from language models, which were previously obscured by standard greedy decoding.
Create account to get full access
Overview
- This study examines a novel approach to enhancing the reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs) without relying on manual prompt engineering.
- The researchers found that chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning paths can be elicited from pre-trained LLMs by altering the decoding process, rather than using specific prompting techniques.
- This method allows for the assessment of the LLMs' intrinsic reasoning abilities and reveals a correlation between the presence of a CoT in the decoding path and higher model confidence in the decoded answer.
Plain English Explanation
Large language models (LLMs) are powerful AI systems that can generate human-like text, but their reasoning abilities are often obscured by the way they are trained and used. Prior research has focused on developing specialized prompting techniques, such as few-shot or zero-shot chain-of-thought (CoT) prompting, to enhance their reasoning skills.
In this study, the researchers took a different approach. They asked: Can LLMs reason effectively without prompting? By altering the decoding process rather than relying on specific prompts, the researchers found that CoT reasoning paths are often inherent in the sequences of alternative tokens that the models generate. This approach allows for the assessment of the LLMs' intrinsic reasoning abilities, bypassing the confounders of prompting.
Interestingly, the researchers also observed that the presence of a CoT in the decoding path correlates with a higher confidence in the model's decoded answer. This confidence metric can be used to differentiate between CoT and non-CoT reasoning paths.
Through extensive empirical studies on various reasoning benchmarks, the researchers demonstrated that their CoT-decoding approach can effectively elicit the reasoning capabilities of language models, which were previously obscured by standard greedy decoding.
Technical Explanation
The researchers' key insight was that CoT reasoning paths can be elicited from pre-trained LLMs by altering the decoding process, rather than relying on manual prompt engineering. Instead of using conventional greedy decoding, which selects the most likely token at each step, the researchers investigated the top-k alternative tokens produced by the model.
Their analysis revealed that CoT paths are frequently present in these alternative token sequences, even when the model is not explicitly prompted to engage in step-by-step reasoning. By uncovering these inherent CoT paths, the researchers were able to assess the LLMs' intrinsic reasoning abilities without the confounding factors of prompting.
Furthermore, the researchers observed a correlation between the presence of a CoT in the decoding path and a higher confidence in the model's decoded answer. This confidence metric can be used as a heuristic to differentiate between CoT and non-CoT reasoning paths, which the researchers leveraged in their extensive empirical studies.
The researchers evaluated their CoT-decoding approach on various reasoning benchmarks, including mathematical reasoning tasks, and found that it effectively elicited the reasoning capabilities of language models that were previously obscured by standard greedy decoding.
Critical Analysis
The researchers' approach offers a novel and intriguing way to assess the reasoning capabilities of LLMs without relying on manual prompt engineering. By focusing on the alternative token sequences generated during decoding, the researchers were able to uncover inherent CoT reasoning paths that were previously hidden.
However, it's important to note that the researchers' findings are based on empirical observations and do not provide a comprehensive explanation of the underlying mechanisms driving the LLMs' reasoning behavior. Further research is needed to understand the factors that influence the presence and quality of CoT paths in the decoding process.
Additionally, the researchers acknowledge that their approach may not be suitable for all types of reasoning tasks, and the performance of CoT-decoding may vary depending on the specific task and model architecture. Continued experimentation and evaluation on a wider range of benchmarks would help validate the generalizability of the researchers' findings.
It would also be valuable to investigate the potential limitations of the confidence metric used to differentiate between CoT and non-CoT paths, as well as explore alternative methods for assessing the reasoning capabilities of LLMs.
Conclusion
This study presents a novel and intriguing approach to enhancing the reasoning capabilities of LLMs without relying on manual prompt engineering. By altering the decoding process, the researchers were able to uncover inherent chain-of-thought reasoning paths in pre-trained language models, allowing for the assessment of their intrinsic reasoning abilities.
The researchers' findings suggest that there is significant potential in exploring alternative decoding strategies to unlock the reasoning capabilities of LLMs, which have been largely obscured by standard greedy decoding. This approach opens up new avenues for research and development in the field of large language models, with potential implications for a wide range of applications that require robust reasoning abilities.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
💬
Boosting Language Models Reasoning with Chain-of-Knowledge Prompting
Jianing Wang, Qiushi Sun, Xiang Li, Ming Gao
0
0
Recently, Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting has delivered success on complex reasoning tasks, which aims at designing a simple prompt like ``Let's think step by step'' or multiple in-context exemplars with well-designed rationales to elicit Large Language Models (LLMs) to generate intermediate reasoning steps. However, the generated rationales often come with mistakes, making unfactual and unfaithful reasoning chains. To mitigate this brittleness, we propose a novel Chain-of-Knowledge (CoK) prompting, where we aim at eliciting LLMs to generate explicit pieces of knowledge evidence in the form of structure triple. This is inspired by our human behaviors, i.e., we can draw a mind map or knowledge map as the reasoning evidence in the brain before answering a complex question. Benefiting from CoK, we additionally introduce a F^2-Verification method to estimate the reliability of the reasoning chains in terms of factuality and faithfulness. For the unreliable response, the wrong evidence can be indicated to prompt the LLM to rethink. Extensive experiments demonstrate that our method can further improve the performance of commonsense, factual, symbolic, and arithmetic reasoning tasks.
6/4/2024
💬
Pattern-Aware Chain-of-Thought Prompting in Large Language Models
Yufeng Zhang, Xuepeng Wang, Lingxiang Wu, Jinqiao Wang
0
0
Chain-of-thought (CoT) prompting can guide language models to engage in complex multi-step reasoning. The quality of provided demonstrations significantly impacts the success of downstream inference tasks. While existing automated methods prioritize accuracy and semantics in these demonstrations, we show that the underlying reasoning patterns play a more crucial role in such tasks. In this paper, we propose Pattern-Aware CoT, a prompting method that considers the diversity of demonstration patterns. By incorporating patterns such as step length and reasoning process within intermediate steps, PA-CoT effectively mitigates the issue of bias induced by demonstrations and enables better generalization to diverse scenarios. We conduct experiments on nine reasoning benchmark tasks using two open-source LLMs. The results show that our method substantially enhances reasoning performance and exhibits robustness to errors. The code will be made publicly available.
4/24/2024
🌿
Chain of Thoughtlessness: An Analysis of CoT in Planning
Kaya Stechly, Karthik Valmeekam, Subbarao Kambhampati
0
0
Large language model (LLM) performance on reasoning problems typically does not generalize out of distribution. Previous work has claimed that this can be mitigated with chain of thought prompting-a method of demonstrating solution procedures-with the intuition that it is possible to in-context teach an LLM an algorithm for solving the problem. This paper presents a case study of chain of thought on problems from Blocksworld, a classical planning domain, and examines the performance of two state-of-the-art LLMs across two axes: generality of examples given in prompt, and complexity of problems queried with each prompt. While our problems are very simple, we only find meaningful performance improvements from chain of thought prompts when those prompts are exceedingly specific to their problem class, and that those improvements quickly deteriorate as the size n of the query-specified stack grows past the size of stacks shown in the examples. We also create scalable variants of three domains commonly studied in previous CoT papers and demonstrate the existence of similar failure modes. Our results hint that, contrary to previous claims in the literature, CoT's performance improvements do not stem from the model learning general algorithmic procedures via demonstrations but depend on carefully engineering highly problem specific prompts. This spotlights drawbacks of chain of thought, especially the sharp tradeoff between possible performance gains and the amount of human labor necessary to generate examples with correct reasoning traces.
6/7/2024
A Hopfieldian View-based Interpretation for Chain-of-Thought Reasoning
Lijie Hu, Liang Liu, Shu Yang, Xin Chen, Hongru Xiao, Mengdi Li, Pan Zhou, Muhammad Asif Ali, Di Wang
0
0
Chain-of-Thought (CoT) holds a significant place in augmenting the reasoning performance for large language models (LLMs). While some studies focus on improving CoT accuracy through methods like retrieval enhancement, yet a rigorous explanation for why CoT achieves such success remains unclear. In this paper, we analyze CoT methods under two different settings by asking the following questions: (1) For zero-shot CoT, why does prompting the model with let's think step by step significantly impact its outputs? (2) For few-shot CoT, why does providing examples before questioning the model could substantially improve its reasoning ability? To answer these questions, we conduct a top-down explainable analysis from the Hopfieldian view and propose a Read-and-Control approach for controlling the accuracy of CoT. Through extensive experiments on seven datasets for three different tasks, we demonstrate that our framework can decipher the inner workings of CoT, provide reasoning error localization, and control to come up with the correct reasoning path.
6/19/2024