Understanding Reasoning Ability of Language Models From the Perspective of Reasoning Paths Aggregation

Overview

• Pre-trained language models (LMs) can perform complex reasoning without explicit fine-tuning
• Researchers propose that LMs derive new conclusions by aggregating indirect reasoning paths seen during pre-training
• This perspective is effective in explaining two important cases of reasoning: logic reasoning with knowledge graphs (KGs) and chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning

Plain English Explanation

Language models (LMs) trained on large amounts of text data have shown the remarkable ability to reason and solve complex problems, even without being explicitly trained on those tasks. Researchers believe that this capability emerges from the way LMs learn to predict the next word in a sequence during pre-training.

The key insight is that LMs may be deriving new conclusions by combining and aggregating the indirect reasoning paths they've encountered in the text data used for pre-training. For example, link to "Distributional Reasoning in LLMs: Parallel Reasoning Processes in Multi-Step Inference" if an LM sees enough examples of "Paris is the capital of France" and "France is in Europe," it can then reason that "Paris is in Europe" without being explicitly trained on that conclusion.

The researchers formalize these reasoning paths as random walk paths on knowledge graphs or reasoning graphs. Their analysis suggests that a weighted sum of the probabilities of these relevant random walk paths can help explain how LMs perform logical reasoning and multi-step reasoning, as seen in link to "Reasoning with Efficient Knowledge Paths: How Knowledge Graph Guides Large Language Models for Multi-hop Inference" and link to "Can Small Language Models Help Large Language Models Reason?".

By understanding this underlying mechanism, the researchers hope to gain insights that can help improve the reasoning capabilities of language models, as explored in link to "Beyond Accuracy: Evaluating Reasoning Behavior of Large Language Models" and link to "The Representational Capacity of Neural Language Models for Chain-of-Thought Reasoning".

Technical Explanation

The researchers propose that we can view a pre-trained language model (LM) as deriving new conclusions by aggregating indirect reasoning paths seen during the pre-training process. They formalize these reasoning paths as random walk paths on knowledge graphs (KGs) or reasoning graphs.

To investigate this perspective, the researchers analyze the learned distributions of LMs and find that a weighted sum of relevant random walk path probabilities can reasonably explain how LMs perform logical reasoning with KGs and chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning.

In the case of logical reasoning with KGs, the researchers show that the probability of an LM generating a correct answer can be approximated by the weighted sum of the probabilities of relevant random walk paths on the KG. This suggests that LMs are able to leverage the indirect reasoning paths encoded in the pre-training data to perform logical inference.

For CoT reasoning, the researchers find that the probabilities of relevant random walk paths on a reasoning graph can also help explain the LM's step-by-step reasoning process. This indicates that LMs are able to combine multiple reasoning steps seen during pre-training to tackle complex, multi-step problems.

Through experiments and analysis on multiple KG and CoT datasets, the researchers demonstrate the effect of training on random walk paths and suggest that augmenting the pre-training data with additional unlabeled random walk reasoning paths can improve the real-world multi-step reasoning performance of LMs.

Critical Analysis

The researchers provide a compelling perspective on how pre-trained language models are able to perform complex reasoning without explicit fine-tuning. The idea of aggregating indirect reasoning paths seen during pre-training is an intriguing explanation for the emergence of such reasoning capabilities.

However, the researchers acknowledge that their analysis is not a complete or definitive explanation for the reasoning abilities of LMs. There may be other mechanisms or factors at play that are not captured by the random walk path perspective.

Additionally, the researchers note that their experiments primarily focused on specific cases of logical reasoning and chain-of-thought reasoning. It would be valuable to further explore the applicability of this perspective to other types of reasoning and problem-solving tasks.

Another potential limitation is the reliance on the availability and quality of the knowledge graphs and reasoning graphs used in the analysis. The performance of the LMs may be influenced by the coverage and accuracy of the information contained in these graphs, which could vary depending on the domain and data sources used.

Despite these caveats, the researchers' work provides a valuable contribution to our understanding of the inner workings of pre-trained language models. By encouraging critical thinking and further exploration, this research can help advance the field of natural language processing and AI reasoning.

Conclusion

This paper presents a novel perspective on how pre-trained language models (LMs) are able to perform complex reasoning without explicit fine-tuning. The researchers propose that LMs derive new conclusions by aggregating indirect reasoning paths encountered during pre-training, which they formalize as random walk paths on knowledge graphs and reasoning graphs.

Through analyses and experiments, the researchers demonstrate that this perspective can effectively explain the logical reasoning and chain-of-thought reasoning capabilities of LMs. Their findings suggest that augmenting pre-training data with additional unlabeled random walk reasoning paths can improve the real-world multi-step reasoning performance of language models.

While not a complete explanation, this research provides valuable insights into the underlying mechanisms that enable the impressive reasoning abilities of pre-trained language models. By encouraging further exploration and critical analysis, this work contributes to our understanding of the representational capacity and reasoning behavior of large language models, which has important implications for the development of more capable and trustworthy AI systems.