Can LLMs perform structured graph reasoning?

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2402.01805v4
• Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2024 14:05:44 GMT
• Title: Can LLMs perform structured graph reasoning?
• Authors: Palaash Agrawal, Shavak Vasania, Cheston Tan,
• Abstract summary: Pretrained Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated various reasoning capabilities through language-based prompts alone. We design various graph reasoning tasks as a proxy to semi-structured tasks in this paper. We benchmark 5 different instruct-finetuned LLMs (GPT-4, GPT-3.5, Claude-2, Llama-2 and Palm-2) on the aforementioned tasks.
• Score: 4.676784872259775
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Pretrained Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated various reasoning capabilities through language-based prompts alone, particularly in unstructured task settings (tasks purely based on language semantics). However, LLMs often struggle with structured tasks, because of the inherent incompatibility of input representation. Reducing structured tasks to uni-dimensional language semantics often renders the problem trivial. Keeping the trade-off between LLM compatibility and structure complexity in mind, we design various graph reasoning tasks as a proxy to semi-structured tasks in this paper, in order to test the ability to navigate through representations beyond plain text in various LLMs. Particularly, we design 10 distinct problems of graph traversal, each representing increasing levels of complexity, and benchmark 5 different instruct-finetuned LLMs (GPT-4, GPT-3.5, Claude-2, Llama-2 and Palm-2) on the aforementioned tasks. Further, we analyse the performance of models across various settings such as varying sizes of graphs as well as different forms of k-shot prompting. We highlight various limitations, biases and properties of LLMs through this benchmarking process, such as an inverse relation to the average degrees of freedom of traversal per node in graphs, the overall negative impact of k-shot prompting on graph reasoning tasks, and a positive response bias which prevents LLMs from identifying the absence of a valid solution. Finally, we introduce a new prompting technique specially designed for graph traversal tasks (PathCompare), which demonstrates a notable increase in the performance of LLMs in comparison to standard prompting techniques such as Chain-of-Thought (CoT).

Related papers

• Interactive and Expressive Code-Augmented Planning with Large Language Models [62.799579304821826]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) demonstrate strong abilities in common-sense reasoning and interactive decision-making. Recent techniques have sought to structure LLM outputs using control flow and other code-adjacent techniques to improve planning performance. We propose REPL-Plan, an LLM planning approach that is fully code-expressive and dynamic.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-21T04:23:17Z)
• NT-LLM: A Novel Node Tokenizer for Integrating Graph Structure into Large Language Models [26.739650151993928]
  Graphs are a fundamental data structure for representing relationships in real-world scenarios. Applying Large Language Models (LLMs) to graph-related tasks poses significant challenges. We introduce Node Tokenizer for Large Language Models (NT-LLM), a novel framework that efficiently encodes graph structures.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-14T17:21:57Z)
• Graph Reasoning with Large Language Models via Pseudo-code Prompting [25.469214467011362]
  This paper investigates whether prompting via pseudo-code instructions can improve the performance of large language models (LLMs) in solving graph problems. Our experiments demonstrate that using pseudo-code instructions generally improves the performance of all considered LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-26T14:52:40Z)
• Revisiting the Graph Reasoning Ability of Large Language Models: Case Studies in Translation, Connectivity and Shortest Path [53.71787069694794]
  We focus on the graph reasoning ability of Large Language Models (LLMs) We revisit the ability of LLMs on three fundamental graph tasks: graph description translation, graph connectivity, and the shortest-path problem. Our findings suggest that LLMs can fail to understand graph structures through text descriptions and exhibit varying performance for all these fundamental tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-18T16:26:39Z)
• Investigating Instruction Tuning Large Language Models on Graphs [37.20541711360419]
  There's growing interest in applying Large Language Models (LLMs) to graph-related tasks. This study delves into the capabilities of instruction-following LLMs for engaging with real-world graphs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-10T06:54:35Z)
• SELF-GUIDE: Better Task-Specific Instruction Following via Self-Synthetic Finetuning [70.21358720599821]
  Large language models (LLMs) hold the promise of solving diverse tasks when provided with appropriate natural language prompts. We propose SELF-GUIDE, a multi-stage mechanism in which we synthesize task-specific input-output pairs from the student LLM. We report an absolute improvement of approximately 15% for classification tasks and 18% for generation tasks in the benchmark's metrics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-16T04:41:58Z)
• Can LLM Graph Reasoning Generalize beyond Pattern Memorization? [46.93972334344908]
  We evaluate whether large language models (LLMs) can go beyond semantic, numeric, structural, reasoning patterns in the synthetic training data and improve utility on real-world graph-based tasks. We find that while post-training alignment is most promising for real-world tasks, empowering LLM graph reasoning to go beyond pattern remains an open research question.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-23T02:59:15Z)
• Can Graph Descriptive Order Affect Solving Graph Problems with LLMs? [38.1577036285387]
  Large language models (LLMs) have achieved significant success in reasoning tasks, including mathematical reasoning and logical deduction. Previous studies have explored LLMs' graph reasoning abilities through various techniques. A critical factor has been mostly overlooked: the prompt sequential order in which graph descriptions are presented to the models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-11T09:46:24Z)
• Integrating Graphs with Large Language Models: Methods and Prospects [68.37584693537555]
  Large language models (LLMs) have emerged as frontrunners, showcasing unparalleled prowess in diverse applications. Merging the capabilities of LLMs with graph-structured data has been a topic of keen interest. This paper bifurcates such integrations into two predominant categories.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-09T07:59:34Z)
• Can Language Models Solve Graph Problems in Natural Language? [51.28850846990929]
  Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly adopted for a variety of tasks with implicit graphical structures. We propose NLGraph, a benchmark of graph-based problem solving simulating in natural language.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-17T08:29:21Z)

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.