Hypothesis Search: Inductive Reasoning with Language Models

Overview

• This paper explores ways to improve the inductive reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs)
• Inductive reasoning is the ability to identify underlying principles from a few examples and apply them to novel scenarios
• The authors propose a pipeline where LLMs generate multiple levels of abstract hypotheses, which are then implemented as concrete Python programs and verified on examples
• This approach is evaluated on several inductive reasoning benchmarks, including the Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus (ARC)

Plain English Explanation

Humans have a remarkable ability to identify underlying patterns from just a few examples and then apply those insights to completely new situations. This capacity for inductive reasoning is a core part of how we solve problems and make sense of the world around us.

Recent work has explored whether large language models (LLMs) can also learn rules and generalize from limited data, often by directly prompting them with inductive reasoning tasks. While this approach works well for simple problems, it struggles on more complex challenges like the Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus (ARC).

In this paper, the authors propose a new technique to enhance the inductive reasoning abilities of LLMs. The key idea is to have the model generate multiple levels of abstract hypotheses about the problem, which are then translated into concrete computer programs. These programs can be tested on the observed examples and then applied to new scenarios.

To make this process more efficient, the authors experiment with steps to filter the hypothesis space, either by asking the LLM to summarize its ideas or by having human annotators select the most promising candidates. When evaluated on ARC and other benchmarks, this approach outperforms the direct prompting baseline, showing the benefits of both the abstract hypothesis generation and the concrete program representations.

Technical Explanation

The core of this work is a pipeline to improve the inductive reasoning capabilities of LLMs. It involves three main steps:

1. Abstract Hypothesis Generation: The LLM is prompted to propose multiple hypotheses about the underlying patterns or rules in the given inductive reasoning problem, expressed in natural language.

2. Concrete Program Representation: These natural language hypotheses are then implemented as concrete Python programs that can be executed on the observed examples.

3. Hypothesis Filtering: To reduce the search space, the authors experiment with two approaches to filter the set of hypotheses: either asking the LLM to summarize its ideas into a smaller set, or having human annotators select the most promising candidates.

This pipeline is evaluated on several inductive reasoning benchmarks, including the Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus (ARC), its 1D variant 1D-ARC, the String Transformation dataset SyGuS, and a List Transformation dataset.

On a 100-problem subset of ARC, the authors' automated pipeline using LLM-generated summaries achieves 30% accuracy, outperforming the direct prompting baseline (17%). When incorporating minimal human input to select from the LLM's candidates, performance is further boosted to 33%.

The authors' ablation studies demonstrate that both the abstract hypothesis generation and the concrete program representations contribute to the improved inductive reasoning capabilities.

Critical Analysis

The authors present a thoughtful approach to enhancing the inductive reasoning abilities of LLMs, which is an important and challenging problem in the field of artificial general intelligence.

One key limitation is that the proposed pipeline still struggles to achieve high performance on complex benchmarks like ARC, suggesting there is more work to be done to fully capture human-level inductive reasoning. The authors acknowledge this and encourage further research into more sophisticated hypothesis generation and filtering mechanisms.

Additionally, the reliance on human-annotated data for the hypothesis filtering step raises questions about the scalability and automation of the approach. Exploring ways to further reduce the need for human input would be an important direction for future work.

That said, the authors' core insight - combining abstract reasoning with concrete program representations - is a promising direction that could inspire new approaches to inductive logic programming and other areas of AI. Continued research in this area has the potential to bring us closer to artificial systems that can rival human-level inductive reasoning capabilities.

Conclusion

This paper presents a novel pipeline to enhance the inductive reasoning abilities of large language models. By prompting the models to generate multiple levels of abstract hypotheses and then implementing them as concrete programs, the authors demonstrate improved performance on a range of inductive reasoning benchmarks.

While there is still room for improvement, especially on more complex tasks, this work represents an important step forward in the quest to develop AI systems with human-like reasoning capabilities. The insights on combining abstract and concrete representations could inspire new directions in areas like program synthesis and deductive-inductive-abductive learning. As the field of AI continues to evolve, research like this will be crucial in pushing the boundaries of what's possible and bringing us closer to artificial general intelligence.