Distilling Algorithmic Reasoning from LLMs via Explaining Solution Programs

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2404.08148v1
• Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2024 22:19:50 GMT
• Title: Distilling Algorithmic Reasoning from LLMs via Explaining Solution Programs
• Authors: Jierui Li, Raymond Mooney,
• Abstract summary: Distilling explicit chain-of-thought reasoning paths has emerged as an effective method for improving the reasoning abilities of large language models. We propose a novel approach to distill reasoning abilities from LLMs by leveraging their capacity to explain solutions. Our experiments demonstrate that learning from explanations enables the Reasoner to more effectively guide program implementation by a Coder.
• Score: 2.3020018305241337
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: Distilling explicit chain-of-thought reasoning paths has emerged as an effective method for improving the reasoning abilities of large language models (LLMs) across various tasks. However, when tackling complex tasks that pose significant challenges for state-of-the-art models, this technique often struggles to produce effective chains of thought that lead to correct answers. In this work, we propose a novel approach to distill reasoning abilities from LLMs by leveraging their capacity to explain solutions. We apply our method to solving competitive-level programming challenges. More specifically, we employ an LLM to generate explanations for a set of <problem, solution-program> pairs, then use <problem, explanation> pairs to fine-tune a smaller language model, which we refer to as the Reasoner, to learn algorithmic reasoning that can generate "how-to-solve" hints for unseen problems. Our experiments demonstrate that learning from explanations enables the Reasoner to more effectively guide program implementation by a Coder, resulting in higher solve rates than strong chain-of-thought baselines on competitive-level programming problems. It also outperforms models that learn directly from <problem, solution-program> pairs. We curated an additional test set in the CodeContests format, which includes 246 more recent problems posted after the models' knowledge cutoff.

Related papers

• Make LLMs better zero-shot reasoners: Structure-orientated autonomous reasoning [52.83539473110143]
  We introduce a novel structure-oriented analysis method to help Large Language Models (LLMs) better understand a question. To further improve the reliability in complex question-answering tasks, we propose a multi-agent reasoning system, Structure-oriented Autonomous Reasoning Agents (SARA) Extensive experiments verify the effectiveness of the proposed reasoning system. Surprisingly, in some cases, the system even surpasses few-shot methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-18T05:30:33Z)
• Enhancing Multi-Step Reasoning Abilities of Language Models through Direct Q-Function Optimization [50.485788083202124]
  Reinforcement Learning (RL) plays a crucial role in aligning large language models with human preferences and improving their ability to perform complex tasks. We introduce Direct Q-function Optimization (DQO), which formulates the response generation process as a Markov Decision Process (MDP) and utilizes the soft actor-critic (SAC) framework to optimize a Q-function directly parameterized by the language model. Experimental results on two math problem-solving datasets, GSM8K and MATH, demonstrate that DQO outperforms previous methods, establishing it as a promising offline reinforcement learning approach for aligning language models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-11T23:29:20Z)
• BloomWise: Enhancing Problem-Solving capabilities of Large Language Models using Bloom's-Taxonomy-Inspired Prompts [59.83547898874152]
  We introduce BloomWise, a new prompting technique, inspired by Bloom's taxonomy, to improve the performance of Large Language Models (LLMs) The decision regarding the need to employ more sophisticated cognitive skills is based on self-evaluation performed by the LLM. In extensive experiments across 4 popular math reasoning datasets, we have demonstrated the effectiveness of our proposed approach.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-05T09:27:52Z)
• 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)
• Reasoning with Large Language Models, a Survey [2.831296564800826]
  This paper reviews the rapidly expanding field of prompt-based reasoning with LLMs. Our taxonomy identifies different ways to generate, evaluate, and control multi-step reasoning. We find that self-improvement, self-reflection, and some meta abilities of the reasoning processes are possible through the judicious use of prompts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-16T08:49:35Z)
• Divide-or-Conquer? Which Part Should You Distill Your LLM? [38.62667131299918]
  We devise a similar strategy that breaks down reasoning tasks into a problem decomposition phase and a problem solving phase. We show that the strategy is able to outperform a single stage solution.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-22T22:28:46Z)
• 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)
• Explaining Competitive-Level Programming Solutions using LLMs [3.560501183771493]
  We show that despite poor performance in solving competitive-level programming problems, state-of-the-art LLMs exhibit a strong capacity in describing and explaining solutions. Our explanation generation methodology can generate a structured solution explanation for the problem containing descriptions and analysis.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-11T15:26:49Z)
• Better patching using LLM prompting, via Self-Consistency [5.892272127970584]
  Self-consistency (S-C) is an exciting, substantially better technique for generating explanations for problems. This paper describes an application of the S-C approach to program repair, using the commit log on the fix as the explanation. We achieve state-of-the art results, beating previous approaches to prompting-based program repair on the MODIT dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-31T18:28:46Z)
• 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.