Enhancing Large Language Models in Coding Through Multi-Perspective Self-Consistency

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2309.17272v3
• Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2024 05:02:02 GMT
• Title: Enhancing Large Language Models in Coding Through Multi-Perspective Self-Consistency
• Authors: Baizhou Huang, Shuai Lu, Weizhu Chen, Xiaojun Wan, Nan Duan,
• Abstract summary: Large language models (LLMs) have exhibited remarkable ability in code generation. However, generating the correct solution in a single attempt still remains a challenge. We propose the Multi-Perspective Self-Consistency (MPSC) framework incorporating both inter- and intra-consistency.
• Score: 127.97467912117652
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have exhibited remarkable ability in code generation. However, generating the correct solution in a single attempt still remains a challenge. Prior works utilize verification properties in software engineering to verify and re-rank solutions in a majority voting manner. But the assumption behind them that generated verification properties have better qualities than solutions may not always hold. In this paper, we treat them equally as different perspectives of LLMs' reasoning processes. We propose the Multi-Perspective Self-Consistency (MPSC) framework incorporating both inter- and intra-consistency across outputs from multiple perspectives. Specifically, we prompt LLMs to generate diverse outputs from three perspectives, Solution, Specification and Test case, constructing a 3-partite graph. With two measure functions of consistency, we embed both inter- and intra-consistency information into the graph. The optimal choice of solutions is then determined based on analysis in the graph. MPSC significantly boosts performance of foundation models (ChatGPT in this paper) on various benchmarks, including HumanEval (+15.91%), MBPP (+6.43%) and CodeContests (+9.37%), even surpassing GPT-4.

Related papers

• Vision-Language Models Can Self-Improve Reasoning via Reflection [20.196406628954303]
  Chain-of-thought (CoT) has proven to improve the reasoning capability of large language models (LLMs) We propose a self-training framework, R3V, which iteratively enhances the model's Vision-language Reasoning by Reflecting on CoT Rationales. Our approach supports self-reflection on generated solutions, further boosting performance through test-time computation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-30T14:45:00Z)
• DARE: Diverse Visual Question Answering with Robustness Evaluation [16.87867803628065]
  Vision Language Models (VLMs) extend remarkable capabilities of text-only large language models and vision-only models. They struggle with a number of crucial vision-language (VL) reasoning abilities such as counting and spatial reasoning. We introduce DARE, Diverse Visual Question Answering with Robustness Evaluation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-26T16:31:50Z)
• Evaluating the Performance of Large Language Models for SDG Mapping (Technical Report) [6.789534723913505]
  Large language models (LLMs) enable users to protect data privacy by eliminating the need to provide data to third parties. We compare the performance of various language models on the Sustainable Development Goal mapping task. According to the results of this study, LLaMA 2 and Gemma still have significant room for improvement.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-05T03:05:02Z)
• What's Wrong with Your Code Generated by Large Language Models? An Extensive Study [80.18342600996601]
  Large language models (LLMs) produce code that is shorter yet more complicated as compared to canonical solutions. We develop a taxonomy of bugs for incorrect codes that includes three categories and 12 sub-categories, and analyze the root cause for common bug types. We propose a novel training-free iterative method that introduces self-critique, enabling LLMs to critique and correct their generated code based on bug types and compiler feedback.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-08T17:27:17Z)
• Can Large Language Models Always Solve Easy Problems if They Can Solve Harder Ones? [65.43882564649721]
  Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive capabilities, but still suffer from inconsistency issues. We develop the ConsisEval benchmark, where each entry comprises a pair of questions with a strict order of difficulty. We analyze the potential for improvement in consistency by relative consistency score.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-18T17:25:47Z)
• Prismatic VLMs: Investigating the Design Space of Visually-Conditioned Language Models [73.40350756742231]
  Visually-conditioned language models (VLMs) have seen growing adoption in applications such as visual dialogue, scene understanding, and robotic task planning. Despite the volume of new releases, key design decisions around image preprocessing, architecture, and optimization are under-explored.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-12T18:21:14Z)
• MAgIC: Investigation of Large Language Model Powered Multi-Agent in Cognition, Adaptability, Rationality and Collaboration [102.41118020705876]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have marked a significant advancement in the field of natural language processing. As their applications extend into multi-agent environments, a need has arisen for a comprehensive evaluation framework. This work introduces a novel benchmarking framework specifically tailored to assess LLMs within multi-agent settings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-14T21:46:27Z)
• Improving Large Language Model Fine-tuning for Solving Math Problems [20.417053742869403]
  A large gap exists between large language models' pass-at-one and pass-at-N performance in solving math problems. Using the challenging MATH dataset, we investigate three fine-tuning strategies. We design a fine-tuning recipe that yields approximately 58.8% accuracy on the MATH dataset with fine-tuned PaLM 2-L models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-16T04:11:19Z)
• Two Failures of Self-Consistency in the Multi-Step Reasoning of LLMs [78.31625291513589]
  We argue that self-consistency is an important criteria for valid multi-step reasoning in tasks where the solution is composed of the answers to multiple sub-steps. We propose two types of self-consistency that are particularly important for multi-step reasoning -- hypothetical consistency and compositional consistency. We demonstrate that multiple variants of the GPT-3/-4 models exhibit poor consistency rates across both types of consistency on a variety of tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-23T17:25:59Z)

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.