Let's Verify Step by Step

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2305.20050v1
• Date: Wed, 31 May 2023 17:24:00 GMT
• Title: Let's Verify Step by Step
• Authors: Hunter Lightman, Vineet Kosaraju, Yura Burda, Harri Edwards, Bowen Baker, Teddy Lee, Jan Leike, John Schulman, Ilya Sutskever, Karl Cobbe
• Abstract summary: We show that process supervision significantly outperforms outcome supervision for training models to solve problems. Our model solves 78% of problems from a representative subset of the MATH test set. We also release PRM800K, the complete dataset of 800,000 step-level human feedback labels used to train our best reward model.
• Score: 73.58107073356732
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: In recent years, large language models have greatly improved in their ability to perform complex multi-step reasoning. However, even state-of-the-art models still regularly produce logical mistakes. To train more reliable models, we can turn either to outcome supervision, which provides feedback for a final result, or process supervision, which provides feedback for each intermediate reasoning step. Given the importance of training reliable models, and given the high cost of human feedback, it is important to carefully compare the both methods. Recent work has already begun this comparison, but many questions still remain. We conduct our own investigation, finding that process supervision significantly outperforms outcome supervision for training models to solve problems from the challenging MATH dataset. Our process-supervised model solves 78% of problems from a representative subset of the MATH test set. Additionally, we show that active learning significantly improves the efficacy of process supervision. To support related research, we also release PRM800K, the complete dataset of 800,000 step-level human feedback labels used to train our best reward model.

Related papers

• Iterative Deepening Sampling for Large Language Models [27.807695570974644]
  Training models to achieve effective self-correction and self-correction remains a significant challenge. We propose a novel iterative sampling algorithm framework designed to enhance self-correction and generate higher-quality samples.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-08T04:39:51Z)
• Self-supervised Analogical Learning using Language Models [59.64260218737556]
  We propose SAL, a self-supervised analogical learning framework. SAL mimics the human analogy process and trains models to explicitly transfer high-quality symbolic solutions. We show that the resulting models outperform base language models on a wide range of reasoning benchmarks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-03T02:31:26Z)
• ToolComp: A Multi-Tool Reasoning & Process Supervision Benchmark [0.0]
  We introduce ToolComp, a benchmark designed to evaluate multi-step tool-use reasoning. ToolComp is developed through a collaboration between models and human annotators. We generate synthetic training data to compare the performance of outcome-supervised reward models with process-supervised reward models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-02T15:10:52Z)
• ProcessBench: Identifying Process Errors in Mathematical Reasoning [62.80402845414901]
  We introduce ProcessBench for measuring the ability to identify erroneous steps in mathematical reasoning. ProcessBench consists of 3,400 test cases, primarily focused on competition- and Olympiad-level math problems. We conduct extensive evaluation on ProcessBench, involving two types of models: process reward models (PRMs) and critic models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-09T15:11:40Z)
• Enhancing LLM Reasoning via Critique Models with Test-Time and Training-Time Supervision [120.40788744292739]
  We propose a two-player paradigm that separates the roles of reasoning and critique models. We first propose AutoMathCritique, an automated and scalable framework for collecting critique data. We demonstrate that the critique models consistently improve the actor's performance on difficult queries at test-time.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-25T17:11:54Z)
• SRA-MCTS: Self-driven Reasoning Augmentation with Monte Carlo Tree Search for Code Generation [14.786100203787194]
  Large language models demonstrate exceptional performance in simple code generation tasks but face challenges in tackling complex problems. We propose a reasoning-augmented data generation process, SRA-MCTS, which guides the model to autonomously generate high-quality intermediate reasoning paths. Our method operates entirely through the model itself without requiring additional supervision.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-17T12:31:04Z)
• Guiding Through Complexity: What Makes Good Supervision for Hard Reasoning Tasks? [74.88417042125985]
  We investigate various data-driven strategies that offer supervision data at different quality levels upon tasks of varying complexity. We find that even when the outcome error rate for hard task supervision is high, training on such data can outperform perfectly correct supervision on easier subtasks. Our results also reveal that supplementing hard task supervision with the corresponding subtask supervision can yield notable performance improvements.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-27T17:55:27Z)
• Multi-step Problem Solving Through a Verifier: An Empirical Analysis on Model-induced Process Supervision [40.984680166762345]
  We introduce Model-induced Process Supervision (MiPS), a novel method for automating data curation. MiPS annotates an intermediate step by sampling completions of this solution through the reasoning model, and obtaining an accuracy defined as the proportion of correct completions. Our approach significantly improves the performance of PaLM 2 on math and coding tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-05T00:57:51Z)
• Teaching Language Models to Self-Improve through Interactive Demonstrations [83.9421355808174]
  Self-improving ability of large language models has been shown to be absent and difficult to learn for smaller models. We introduce TriPosT, a training algorithm that endows smaller models with such self-improvement ability. We show that our approach can improve a LLaMA-7b's performance on math and reasoning tasks by up to 7.13%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-20T14:11:04Z)
• Learning to Modulate pre-trained Models in RL [22.812215561012874]
  Fine-tuning a pre-trained model often suffers from catastrophic forgetting. Our study shows that with most fine-tuning approaches, the performance on pre-training tasks deteriorates significantly. We propose a novel method, Learning-to-Modulate (L2M), that avoids the degradation of learned skills by modulating the information flow of the frozen pre-trained model.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-26T17:53:05Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.