Reasoning Capacity in Multi-Agent Systems: Limitations, Challenges and
Human-Centered Solutions
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2402.01108v1
- Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2024 02:53:11 GMT
- Title: Reasoning Capacity in Multi-Agent Systems: Limitations, Challenges and
Human-Centered Solutions
- Authors: Pouya Pezeshkpour, Eser Kandogan, Nikita Bhutani, Sajjadur Rahman, Tom
Mitchell, Estevam Hruschka
- Abstract summary: We present a formal definition of reasoning capacity and illustrate its utility in identifying limitations within each component of the system.
We then argue how these limitations can be addressed with a self-reflective process wherein human-feedback is used to alleviate shortcomings in reasoning.
- Score: 14.398238217358116
- License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
- Abstract: Remarkable performance of large language models (LLMs) in a variety of tasks
brings forth many opportunities as well as challenges of utilizing them in
production settings. Towards practical adoption of LLMs, multi-agent systems
hold great promise to augment, integrate, and orchestrate LLMs in the larger
context of enterprise platforms that use existing proprietary data and models
to tackle complex real-world tasks. Despite the tremendous success of these
systems, current approaches rely on narrow, single-focus objectives for
optimization and evaluation, often overlooking potential constraints in
real-world scenarios, including restricted budgets, resources and time.
Furthermore, interpreting, analyzing, and debugging these systems requires
different components to be evaluated in relation to one another. This demand is
currently not feasible with existing methodologies. In this postion paper, we
introduce the concept of reasoning capacity as a unifying criterion to enable
integration of constraints during optimization and establish connections among
different components within the system, which also enable a more holistic and
comprehensive approach to evaluation. We present a formal definition of
reasoning capacity and illustrate its utility in identifying limitations within
each component of the system. We then argue how these limitations can be
addressed with a self-reflective process wherein human-feedback is used to
alleviate shortcomings in reasoning and enhance overall consistency of the
system.
Related papers
- Optimal Decision Making Through Scenario Simulations Using Large Language Models [0.0]
Large Language Models (LLMs) have transformed how complex problems are approached and solved.
This paper proposes an innovative approach to bridge this capability gap.
By enabling LLMs to request multiple potential options and their respective parameters from users, our system introduces a dynamic framework.
This function is designed to analyze the provided options, simulate potential outcomes, and determine the most advantageous solution.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-07-09T01:23:09Z) - Can Long-Context Language Models Subsume Retrieval, RAG, SQL, and More? [54.667202878390526]
Long-context language models (LCLMs) have the potential to revolutionize our approach to tasks traditionally reliant on external tools like retrieval systems or databases.
We introduce LOFT, a benchmark of real-world tasks requiring context up to millions of tokens designed to evaluate LCLMs' performance on in-context retrieval and reasoning.
Our findings reveal LCLMs' surprising ability to rival state-of-the-art retrieval and RAG systems, despite never having been explicitly trained for these tasks.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-06-19T00:28:58Z) - Meta Reasoning for Large Language Models [58.87183757029041]
We introduce Meta-Reasoning Prompting (MRP), a novel and efficient system prompting method for large language models (LLMs)
MRP guides LLMs to dynamically select and apply different reasoning methods based on the specific requirements of each task.
We evaluate the effectiveness of MRP through comprehensive benchmarks.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-06-17T16:14:11Z) - Beyond LLMs: Advancing the Landscape of Complex Reasoning [0.35813349058229593]
EC AI platform takes a neuro-symbolic approach to solving constraint satisfaction and optimization problems.
System employs precise and high performance logical reasoning engine.
System supports developers in specifying application logic in natural and concise language.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-02-12T21:14:45Z) - A Unified Framework for Probabilistic Verification of AI Systems via
Weighted Model Integration [13.275592130089953]
Probability formal verification (PFV) of AI systems is in its infancy.
We propose a unifying framework for the PFV of AI systems based onWeighted Model Integration (WMI)
This reduction enables the verification of many properties of interest, like fairness, robustness or monotonicity, over a wide range of machine learning models.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-02-07T14:24:04Z) - Solution-oriented Agent-based Models Generation with Verifier-assisted
Iterative In-context Learning [10.67134969207797]
Agent-based models (ABMs) stand as an essential paradigm for proposing and validating hypothetical solutions or policies.
Large language models (LLMs) encapsulating cross-domain knowledge and programming proficiency could potentially alleviate the difficulty of this process.
We present SAGE, a general solution-oriented ABM generation framework designed for automatic modeling and generating solutions for targeted problems.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-02-04T07:59:06Z) - Rethinking and Benchmarking Predict-then-Optimize Paradigm for
Combinatorial Optimization Problems [62.25108152764568]
Many web applications rely on solving optimization problems, such as energy cost-aware scheduling, budget allocation on web advertising, and graph matching on social networks.
We consider the performance of prediction and decision-making in a unified system.
We provide a comprehensive categorization of current approaches and integrate existing experimental scenarios.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-11-13T13:19:34Z) - Corex: Pushing the Boundaries of Complex Reasoning through Multi-Model Collaboration [83.4031923134958]
Corex is a suite of novel general-purpose strategies that transform Large Language Models into autonomous agents.
Inspired by human behaviors, Corex is constituted by diverse collaboration paradigms including Debate, Review, and Retrieve modes.
We demonstrate that orchestrating multiple LLMs to work in concert yields substantially better performance compared to existing methods.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-09-30T07:11:39Z) - Large Process Models: Business Process Management in the Age of
Generative AI [4.249492423406116]
Large Process Model (LPM) combines correlation power of Large Language Models with analytical precision and reliability of knowledge-based systems and automated reasoning approaches.
LPM would allow organizations to receive context-specific (tailored) process and other business models, analytical deep-dives, and improvement recommendations.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-09-02T10:32:53Z) - Automatically Correcting Large Language Models: Surveying the landscape
of diverse self-correction strategies [104.32199881187607]
Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable performance across a wide array of NLP tasks.
A promising approach to rectify these flaws is self-correction, where the LLM itself is prompted or guided to fix problems in its own output.
This paper presents a comprehensive review of this emerging class of techniques.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-08-06T18:38:52Z) - Learning What to Defer for Maximum Independent Sets [84.00112106334655]
We propose a novel DRL scheme, coined learning what to defer (LwD), where the agent adaptively shrinks or stretch the number of stages by learning to distribute the element-wise decisions of the solution at each stage.
We apply the proposed framework to the maximum independent set (MIS) problem, and demonstrate its significant improvement over the current state-of-the-art DRL scheme.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-06-17T02:19:31Z)
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.