Fill in the Blank: Exploring and Enhancing LLM Capabilities for Backward Reasoning in Math Word Problems

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2310.01991v2
• Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2024 03:33:43 GMT
• Title: Fill in the Blank: Exploring and Enhancing LLM Capabilities for Backward Reasoning in Math Word Problems
• Authors: Aniruddha Deb, Neeva Oza, Sarthak Singla, Dinesh Khandelwal, Dinesh Garg, Parag Singla,
• Abstract summary: backward reasoning is relatively unexplored. backward reasoning can be seen as the ''inverse'' of forward reasoning. We propose variations of three different forward reasoning strategies to improve performance.
• Score: 17.80128896525717
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: While forward reasoning (i.e., find the answer given the question) has been explored extensively in recent literature, backward reasoning is relatively unexplored. We examine the backward reasoning capabilities of LLMs on Math Word Problems (MWPs): given a mathematical question and its answer, with some details omitted from the question, can LLMs effectively retrieve the missing information? On modifying three benchmark datasets for this task, to evaluate this task: GSM8k, SVAMP, and MultiArith, we find a significant drop in the accuracy of models on this task compared to forward reasoning across SOTA LLMs (GPT4, GPT3.5, PaLM-2, and LLaMa). Motivated by the fact backward reasoning can be seen as the ''inverse'' of forward reasoning, we propose variations of three different forward reasoning strategies to improve performance. Rephrase reformulates the given problem into a forward reasoning problem, PAL-Tools combines the idea of Program-Aided LLMs to produce a set of equations that can be solved by an external solver, and Check your Work exploits the availability of natural verifier of high accuracy in the forward direction, interleaving solving and verification steps. Finally, realizing that each of our base methods correctly solves a different set of problems, we propose a novel Bayesian formulation for creating an ensemble over the base methods to further boost the accuracy. Extensive experimentation demonstrates successive improvement in the performance of LLMs on the backward reasoning task, using our strategies, with our ensemble-based method resulting in significant performance gains compared to the SOTA forward reasoning strategies we adapt.

Related papers

• Can LLMs plan paths with extra hints from solvers? [2.874944508343474]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown remarkable capabilities in natural language processing, mathematical problem solving, and tasks related to program synthesis. This paper explores an approach for enhancing LLM performance in solving a classical robotic planning task by integrating solver-generated feedback.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-07T14:00:08Z)
• Improving LLM Reasoning through Scaling Inference Computation with Collaborative Verification [52.095460362197336]
  Large language models (LLMs) struggle with consistent and accurate reasoning. LLMs are trained primarily on correct solutions, reducing their ability to detect and learn from errors. We propose a novel collaborative method integrating Chain-of-Thought (CoT) and Program-of-Thought (PoT) solutions for verification.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-05T05:21:48Z)
• DOTS: Learning to Reason Dynamically in LLMs via Optimal Reasoning Trajectories Search [37.16633337724158]
  DOTS is an approach enabling LLMs to reason dynamically via optimal reasoning trajectory search. Our method consistently outperforms static reasoning techniques and the vanilla instruction tuning approach.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-04T18:58:09Z)
• Deconfounded Causality-aware Parameter-Efficient Fine-Tuning for Problem-Solving Improvement of LLMs [12.48241058167222]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable efficiency in tackling various tasks based on human instructions. But studies reveal that they often struggle with tasks requiring reasoning, such as math or physics limitation. This raises questions about whether LLMs truly comprehend embedded knowledge or merely learn to replicate the token distribution without a true understanding of the content. We propose Decon Causal Adaptation (DCA), a novel parameter-efficient fine-tuning (PEFT) method to enhance the model's reasoning capabilities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-04T13:17:09Z)
• Step-by-Step Reasoning to Solve Grid Puzzles: Where do LLMs Falter? [36.14795256060537]
  We develop GridPuzzle, an evaluation dataset comprising 274 grid-based puzzles with different complexities. Second, we propose a new error taxonomy derived from manual analysis of reasoning chains from LLMs including GPT-4, Claude-3, Gemini, Mistral, and Llama-2. Third, we develop an LLM-based framework for large-scale subjective evaluation (i.e., identifying errors) and an objective metric, PuzzleEval, to evaluate the correctness of reasoning chains.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-20T07:43:07Z)
• MindStar: Enhancing Math Reasoning in Pre-trained LLMs at Inference Time [51.5039731721706]
  MindStar is a purely inference-based searching method for large language models. It formulates reasoning tasks as searching problems and proposes two search ideas to identify the optimal reasoning paths. It significantly enhances the reasoning abilities of open-source models, such as Llama-2-13B and Mistral-7B, and achieves comparable performance to GPT-3.5 and Grok-1.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-25T15:07:33Z)
• Achieving >97% on GSM8K: Deeply Understanding the Problems Makes LLMs Better Solvers for Math Word Problems [50.76385564061713]
  Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting has enhanced the performance of Large Language Models (LLMs) across various reasoning tasks. CoT usually suffers from three pitfalls: semantic misunderstanding errors, calculation errors, and step-missing errors. We propose Deeply Understanding the Problems (DUP) to improve the LLMs' math problem-solving ability by addressing semantic misunderstanding errors.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-23T12:16:05Z)
• GSM-Plus: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Evaluating the Robustness of LLMs as Mathematical Problem Solvers [68.77382332826167]
  Large language models (LLMs) have achieved impressive performance across various mathematical reasoning benchmarks. One essential and frequently occurring evidence is that when the math questions are slightly changed, LLMs can behave incorrectly. This motivates us to evaluate the robustness of LLMs' math reasoning capability by testing a wide range of question variations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-29T15:26:14Z)
• Thought Propagation: An Analogical Approach to Complex Reasoning with Large Language Models [62.96551299003463]
  We propose textbftextitThought Propagation (TP) to enhance the complex reasoning ability of Large Language Models. TP first prompts LLMs to propose and solve a set of analogous problems that are related to the input one. TP reuses the results of analogous problems to directly yield a new solution or derive a knowledge-intensive plan for execution to amend the initial solution obtained from scratch.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-06T01:40:09Z)
• SatLM: Satisfiability-Aided Language Models Using Declarative Prompting [68.40726892904286]
  We propose a new satisfiability-aided language modeling (SatLM) approach for improving the reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs) We use an LLM to generate a declarative task specification rather than an imperative program and leverage an off-the-shelf automated theorem prover to derive the final answer. We evaluate SATLM on 8 different datasets and show that it consistently outperforms program-aided LMs in the imperative paradigm.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-16T17:55:51Z)

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.