Rephrase and Respond: Let Large Language Models Ask Better Questions for Themselves

Overview

• This paper addresses the issue of misunderstandings that can arise between humans and Large Language Models (LLMs) when using seemingly unambiguous questions.
• The authors present a method called "Rephrase and Respond" (RaR) that allows LLMs to rephrase and expand questions posed by humans, and then provide responses in a single prompt.
• The paper also introduces a two-step variant of RaR, where one LLM rephrases the question and then a different LLM responds to the original and rephrased questions.
• The authors demonstrate that their methods significantly improve the performance of different LLMs across a wide range of tasks, and compare RaR to the popular Chain-of-Thought (CoT) methods.

Plain English Explanation

Large language models (LLMs) are powerful AI systems that can understand and generate human-like text. However, even when humans ask seemingly clear questions, LLMs can sometimes interpret them in unexpected ways, leading to incorrect responses. The authors of this paper have developed a method called "Rephrase and Respond" (RaR) to help address this issue.

The RaR method allows an LLM to first rephrase the original question in its own words, and then provide a response to both the original and rephrased questions. This helps the LLM better understand the intended meaning of the question, leading to more accurate and relevant responses.

The authors also introduce a two-step version of RaR, where one LLM rephrases the question, and then a different LLM provides the final response. This approach allows the strengths of multiple LLMs to be combined, further improving the quality of the answers.

The researchers tested their RaR methods on a variety of tasks and found that they significantly outperformed other approaches, including the popular Chain-of-Thought (CoT) methods. They also show that RaR can be used in conjunction with CoT to achieve even better performance.

Overall, this research helps to enhance the performance of LLMs and sheds light on ways to more accurately evaluate their capabilities. By bridging the gap between human questions and LLM interpretations, the RaR method represents an important step forward in the field of natural language processing.

Technical Explanation

The authors of this paper recognized that misunderstandings can arise not only in interpersonal communication, but also between humans and Large Language Models (LLMs). These discrepancies can cause LLMs to interpret seemingly unambiguous questions in unexpected ways, leading to incorrect responses.

To address this issue, the researchers developed a method called "Rephrase and Respond" (RaR). RaR allows an LLM to first rephrase the original question posed by the human and then provide a response to both the original and rephrased questions in a single prompt. This approach helps the LLM better understand the intended meaning of the question, leading to more accurate and relevant responses.

The authors also introduced a two-step variant of RaR, where one LLM rephrases the question and then a different LLM provides the final response. This facilitates the effective utilization of rephrased questions generated by one LLM with another, further improving the quality of the answers.

The researchers conducted experiments to evaluate the performance of their RaR methods across a wide range of tasks. Their results demonstrated that RaR significantly outperformed other approaches, including the popular Chain-of-Thought (CoT) methods.

Additionally, the authors provided a comprehensive comparison between RaR and CoT, both theoretically and empirically. They showed that RaR is complementary to CoT and can be combined with CoT to achieve even better performance.

Critical Analysis

The authors of this paper have made a valuable contribution to the field of natural language processing by addressing the issue of misunderstandings between humans and LLMs. Their RaR method represents a practical and effective approach for improving the performance of LLMs in responding to human-generated questions.

However, the paper does not provide a detailed analysis of the limitations of the RaR method. For example, it would be helpful to understand the types of questions or tasks where RaR may not perform as well, or the computational resources required to implement the method.

Additionally, the paper does not explore the potential biases or ethical implications of the RaR method. As with any AI-based system, it is important to consider how the method might amplify or introduce biases in the responses provided by LLMs.

Overall, the RaR method represents a promising approach for enhancing the performance of LLMs and improving the accuracy of their responses to human-generated questions. The authors have made a valuable contribution to the field, but further research is needed to fully understand the limitations and potential implications of the method.

Conclusion

This paper presents a novel method called "Rephrase and Respond" (RaR) that addresses the issue of misunderstandings between humans and Large Language Models (LLMs). By allowing LLMs to rephrase and expand questions posed by humans, and then provide responses to both the original and rephrased questions, the RaR method helps to bridge the gap between human intent and LLM interpretation.

The researchers demonstrate that their RaR methods significantly outperform other approaches, including the popular Chain-of-Thought (CoT) methods, across a wide range of tasks. They also show that RaR can be combined with CoT to achieve even better performance, highlighting the complementary nature of the two approaches.

This research not only contributes to enhancing the performance of LLMs, but also sheds light on the importance of fair and accurate evaluation of LLM capabilities. By addressing the issue of misunderstandings, the RaR method represents an important step forward in the development of more reliable and trustworthy language AI systems.