A Symbolic Framework for Evaluating Mathematical Reasoning and Generalisation with Transformers

Overview

• The paper proposes a methodology for generating and perturbing detailed mathematical derivations at scale to evaluate the generalizability of Transformer language models like GPT-4, GPT-3.5, and fine-tuned BERT models to out-of-distribution mathematical reasoning problems.
• The authors compare the performance of these models on sequence classification tasks, exploring how specific mathematical operators and reasoning aspects like symmetry and variable surface forms impact their generalization.
• The results suggest that fine-tuned models can rival the in-distribution performance of GPT, but are still vulnerable to large performance drops when the input reasoning is perturbed.
• The authors release the codebase, datasets, and models to encourage further research in this area.

Plain English Explanation

The researchers wanted to see how well large language models like GPT-4 and GPT-3.5 can handle mathematical reasoning problems, especially when the problems are different from the ones they were trained on. To do this, they developed a way to automatically generate and tweak detailed mathematical equations and derivations.

They then used these perturbed equations to test the models on sequence classification tasks - for example, determining whether an equation is correct or not. Surprisingly, they found that smaller, open-source models that had been fine-tuned on appropriate training data could match the in-distribution performance of GPT. However, when the input reasoning was changed, even slightly, the fine-tuned models' performance dropped significantly, by up to 80 points.

This suggests that while these smaller models can be trained to perform well on standard math problems, they still struggle to generalize their mathematical reasoning abilities, much like the larger GPT models. The researchers believe this reflects a shared weakness in how these language models handle indirect references to mathematical concepts.

By releasing all their code, datasets, and trained models, the researchers hope to spur further progress in developing language models that can truly excel at flexible, generalizable mathematical reasoning.

Technical Explanation

The paper proposes a framework for systematically generating and perturbing detailed mathematical derivations to assess the generalization capabilities of Transformer-based language models like GPT-4, GPT-3.5, and fine-tuned BERT models.

The authors instantiate this framework in the context of sequence classification tasks, where models must determine whether a given mathematical expression or derivation is correct. They compare the performance of the language models, exploring how perturbations to the input reasoning - such as changes to symmetry or variable surface forms - impact their generalization.

Surprisingly, the results show that the average in-distribution performance of fine-tuned BERT models can rival that of GPT-3.5, and even approach GPT-4. However, the fine-tuned models are still highly vulnerable to perturbations, with their performance dropping by up to 80 F1 points. This suggests a shared weakness between BERT and GPT in their ability to decode indirect references to mathematical entities.

The authors release the full codebase, datasets, and fine-tuned models to encourage further research into enhancing the mathematical reasoning capabilities of large language models and improving their generalization to out-of-distribution problems.

Critical Analysis

The paper provides a compelling and rigorous framework for evaluating the generalization capabilities of Transformer-based language models in the domain of mathematical reasoning. By systematically perturbing the input derivations, the authors are able to uncover key weaknesses in the models' ability to handle indirect references and changes to the underlying reasoning.

However, the paper does not delve deeply into the potential reasons for these generalization failures. It would be helpful to have a more thorough analysis of the specific modeling and architectural choices that may be contributing to the observed limitations. Additionally, the authors could explore potential approaches for improving the models' robustness, such as using more diverse training data or incorporating stronger inductive biases related to mathematical reasoning.

Furthermore, the paper focuses solely on sequence classification tasks, which may not fully capture the depth and nuance of mathematical problem-solving. It would be valuable to extend the evaluation to more open-ended mathematical tasks, such as proof generation or equation solving, to better understand the models' broader capabilities and limitations.

Despite these minor limitations, the paper makes a significant contribution to the field by providing a rigorous framework for evaluating the mathematical reasoning capabilities of large language models and highlighting crucial areas for future research and development.

Conclusion

This paper presents a novel methodology for systematically generating and perturbing mathematical derivations to assess the generalization capabilities of Transformer-based language models. The results suggest that while fine-tuned models can match the in-distribution performance of GPT, they still struggle to handle perturbations to the underlying reasoning, revealing a shared weakness in their ability to decode indirect references to mathematical entities.

By releasing the codebase, datasets, and trained models, the authors have provided a valuable resource for the research community to further explore the mathematical reasoning capabilities of large language models and develop more robust and generalizable approaches. This work represents an important step towards enhancing the ability of AI systems to engage in flexible, contextual mathematical problem-solving, which has far-reaching implications for fields ranging from scientific discovery to education and beyond.