On the Empirical Complexity of Reasoning and Planning in LLMs
2404.11041
0
0
Abstract
Chain-of-thought (CoT), tree-of-thought (ToT), and related techniques work surprisingly well in practice for some complex reasoning tasks with Large Language Models (LLMs), but why? This work seeks the underlying reasons by conducting experimental case studies and linking the performance benefits to well-established sample and computational complexity principles in machine learning. We experimented with 6 reasoning tasks, ranging from grade school math, air travel planning, ..., to Blocksworld. The results suggest that (i) both CoT and ToT benefit significantly from task decomposition, which breaks a complex reasoning task into a sequence of steps with low sample complexity and explicitly outlines the reasoning structure, and (ii) for computationally hard reasoning tasks, the more sophisticated tree structure of ToT outperforms the linear structure of CoT. These findings provide useful guidelines for the use of LLM in solving reasoning tasks in practice.
Create account to get full access
Overview
- This paper examines the empirical complexity of reasoning and planning tasks in large language models (LLMs).
- The researchers conducted experiments to assess the ability of LLMs to perform multi-step reasoning and planning.
- The results suggest that while LLMs can excel at certain reasoning and planning tasks, they also exhibit limitations that highlight the need for further research and advancements in these areas.
Plain English Explanation
The paper investigates how well large language models (LLMs), like the ones used in chatbots and AI assistants, can perform complex reasoning and planning tasks. The researchers ran a series of experiments to see how LLMs handle multi-step problems that require logical thinking and strategizing.
The results show that LLMs can be quite good at certain types of reasoning and planning, such as [link to "Empowering Multi-step Reasoning Across Languages via Instruction Following"]. However, the models also have some limitations when it comes to more intricate, step-by-step reasoning [link to "How to Think Step-by-Step: Mechanistic Interpretability for Chain-of-Thought Reasoning"]. This suggests that while LLMs are powerful, there is still room for improvement in their ability to tackle complex, multi-part problems [link to "Chain Preference Optimization: Improving Chain-of-Thought Reasoning"].
The researchers also found that the size of the LLM seems to play a role, with larger models generally performing better on these tasks [link to "Can Only LLMs Do Reasoning? The Potential of Small Models"]. This highlights the importance of continued research and development in this area to create even more capable AI systems [link to "Synergy of Thoughts: Eliciting Efficient Reasoning in Hybrid Language Models"].
Technical Explanation
The paper examines the empirical complexity of reasoning and planning tasks in large language models (LLMs). The researchers conducted a series of experiments to assess the ability of LLMs to perform multi-step reasoning and planning.
The experiment design involved testing the LLMs on a variety of tasks that required logical thinking and strategizing over multiple steps. This included problems like solving mathematical word problems, planning routes, and making decisions based on complex constraints.
The results showed that LLMs can excel at certain types of reasoning and planning tasks, particularly those that involve straightforward, single-step logic. However, the models struggled more with problems that required deeper, multi-step reasoning and the ability to plan and execute a sequence of steps.
The researchers found that the size of the LLM played a role, with larger models generally performing better on the more complex reasoning and planning tasks. This suggests that scaling up the models' size and training data may be one avenue for improving their capabilities in this area.
Critical Analysis
The paper provides valuable insights into the limitations of current LLMs when it comes to complex reasoning and planning. While the models can handle certain types of logical problems, the research highlights the need for further advancements to enable LLMs to tackle more intricate, multi-step challenges.
One potential area for improvement mentioned in the paper is the ability to incorporate more explicit reasoning and planning mechanisms into the models, rather than relying solely on implicit learning [link to "How to Think Step-by-Step: Mechanistic Interpretability for Chain-of-Thought Reasoning"]. This could involve developing novel architectural designs or training approaches that better support step-by-step logical processing and strategic planning.
Additionally, the paper suggests that the size and scale of the LLMs may play a significant role in their reasoning and planning capabilities. This raises questions about the practical limitations and costs of continually scaling up these models, and whether alternative approaches, such as [link to "Can Only LLMs Do Reasoning? The Potential of Small Models"], may be more effective in the long run.
Overall, the research underscores the importance of continued exploration and innovation in the field of reasoning and planning in AI, to ensure that these critical capabilities are developed alongside the impressive language understanding and generation abilities of LLMs.
Conclusion
This paper provides a detailed examination of the empirical complexity of reasoning and planning tasks in large language models (LLMs). The researchers found that while LLMs can excel at certain types of logical problems, they also exhibit limitations when it comes to more intricate, multi-step reasoning and planning.
The results highlight the need for further advancements in AI to enable more robust and capable reasoning and planning abilities, which are essential for building truly intelligent systems that can tackle complex, real-world challenges. The insights from this research could inform the development of novel architectural designs, training approaches, and hybrid models that combine the strengths of LLMs with more explicit reasoning and planning mechanisms [link to "Synergy of Thoughts: Eliciting Efficient Reasoning in Hybrid Language Models"].
Overall, this paper contributes to the ongoing efforts to push the boundaries of what AI systems can achieve, and to develop more sophisticated, adaptable, and capable artificial intelligence that can truly assist and empower humans in meaningful ways.
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
📊
Empowering Multi-step Reasoning across Languages via Tree-of-Thoughts
Leonardo Ranaldi, Giulia Pucci, Federico Ranaldi, Elena Sofia Ruzzetti, Fabio Massimo Zanzotto
0
0
Reasoning methods, best exemplified by the well-known Chain-of-Thought (CoT), empower the reasoning abilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) by eliciting them to solve complex tasks in a step-by-step manner. Although they are achieving significant success, the ability to deliver multi-step reasoning remains limited to English because of the imbalance in the distribution of pre-training data, which makes other languages a barrier. In this paper, we propose Cross-lingual Tree-of-Thoughts (Cross-ToT), a method for aligning Cross-lingual CoT reasoning across languages. The proposed method, through a self-consistent cross-lingual prompting mechanism inspired by the Tree-of-Thoughts approach, provides multi-step reasoning paths in different languages that, during the steps, lead to the final solution. Experimental evaluations show that our method significantly outperforms existing prompting methods by reducing the number of interactions and achieving state-of-the-art performance.
6/24/2024
🤔
How to think step-by-step: A mechanistic understanding of chain-of-thought reasoning
Subhabrata Dutta, Joykirat Singh, Soumen Chakrabarti, Tanmoy Chakraborty
0
0
Despite superior reasoning prowess demonstrated by Large Language Models (LLMs) with Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting, a lack of understanding prevails around the internal mechanisms of the models that facilitate CoT generation. This work investigates the neural sub-structures within LLMs that manifest CoT reasoning from a mechanistic point of view. From an analysis of Llama-2 7B applied to multistep reasoning over fictional ontologies, we demonstrate that LLMs deploy multiple parallel pathways of answer generation for step-by-step reasoning. These parallel pathways provide sequential answers from the input question context as well as the generated CoT. We observe a functional rift in the middle layers of the LLM. Token representations in the initial half remain strongly biased towards the pretraining prior, with the in-context prior taking over in the later half. This internal phase shift manifests in different functional components: attention heads that write the answer token appear in the later half, attention heads that move information along ontological relationships appear in the initial half, and so on. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first attempt towards mechanistic investigation of CoT reasoning in LLMs.
5/7/2024
Chain of Preference Optimization: Improving Chain-of-Thought Reasoning in LLMs
Xuan Zhang, Chao Du, Tianyu Pang, Qian Liu, Wei Gao, Min Lin
0
0
The recent development of chain-of-thought (CoT) decoding has enabled large language models (LLMs) to generate explicit logical reasoning paths for complex problem-solving. However, research indicates that these paths are not always deliberate and optimal. The tree-of-thought (ToT) method employs tree-searching to extensively explore the reasoning space and find better reasoning paths that CoT decoding might overlook. This deliberation, however, comes at the cost of significantly increased inference complexity. In this work, we demonstrate that fine-tuning LLMs leveraging the search tree constructed by ToT allows CoT to achieve similar or better performance, thereby avoiding the substantial inference burden. This is achieved through Chain of Preference Optimization (CPO), where LLMs are fine-tuned to align each step of the CoT reasoning paths with those of ToT using the inherent preference information in the tree-search process. Extensive experimental results show that CPO significantly improves LLM performance in solving a variety of complex problems, including question answering, fact verification, and arithmetic reasoning, demonstrating its effectiveness. Our code is available at https://github.com/sail-sg/CPO.
6/14/2024
🧠
On the Representational Capacity of Neural Language Models with Chain-of-Thought Reasoning
Franz Nowak, Anej Svete, Alexandra Butoi, Ryan Cotterell
0
0
The performance of modern language models (LMs) has been improved by chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning, i.e., the process of generating intermediate results that guide the model towards a final answer. A possible explanation for this improvement is that CoT reasoning extends an LM's computational power, as RNNs and transformers with additional scratch space are known to be Turing complete. Comparing LMs to Turing machines, however, introduces a category error - Turing machines decide language membership, whereas LMs define distributions over strings. To bridge this gap, we formalize CoT reasoning in a probabilistic setting. We present several results on the representational capacity of recurrent and transformer LMs with CoT reasoning, showing that they can represent the same family of distributions over strings as probabilistic Turing machines.
6/21/2024