Logic Agent: Enhancing Validity with Logic Rule Invocation

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2404.18130v1
• Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2024 10:02:28 GMT
• Title: Logic Agent: Enhancing Validity with Logic Rule Invocation
• Authors: Hanmeng Liu, Zhiyang Teng, Chaoli Zhang, Yue Zhang,
• Abstract summary: Chain-of-Thought prompting has emerged as a pivotal technique for augmenting the inferential capabilities of language models during reasoning tasks. This paper introduces the Logic Agent (LA), an agent-based framework aimed at enhancing the validity of reasoning processes in Large Language Models.
• Score: 24.815341366820753
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting has emerged as a pivotal technique for augmenting the inferential capabilities of language models during reasoning tasks. Despite its advancements, CoT often grapples with challenges in validating reasoning validity and ensuring informativeness. Addressing these limitations, this paper introduces the Logic Agent (LA), an agent-based framework aimed at enhancing the validity of reasoning processes in Large Language Models (LLMs) through strategic logic rule invocation. Unlike conventional approaches, LA transforms LLMs into logic agents that dynamically apply propositional logic rules, initiating the reasoning process by converting natural language inputs into structured logic forms. The logic agent leverages a comprehensive set of predefined functions to systematically navigate the reasoning process. This methodology not only promotes the structured and coherent generation of reasoning constructs but also significantly improves their interpretability and logical coherence. Through extensive experimentation, we demonstrate LA's capacity to scale effectively across various model sizes, markedly improving the precision of complex reasoning across diverse tasks.

Related papers

• Reversal of Thought: Enhancing Large Language Models with Preference-Guided Reverse Reasoning Warm-up [9.42385235462794]
  Large language models (LLMs) have shown remarkable performance in reasoning tasks but face limitations in mathematical and complex logical reasoning. We propose Reversal of Thought (RoT), a novel framework aimed at enhancing the logical reasoning abilities of LLMs. RoT utilizes a Preference-Guided Reverse Reasoning warm-up strategy, which integrates logical symbols for pseudocode planning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-16T07:44:28Z)
• Proof of Thought : Neurosymbolic Program Synthesis allows Robust and Interpretable Reasoning [1.3003982724617653]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have revolutionized natural language processing, yet they struggle with inconsistent reasoning. This research introduces Proof of Thought, a framework that enhances the reliability and transparency of LLM outputs. Key contributions include a robust type system with sort management for enhanced logical integrity, explicit representation of rules for clear distinction between factual and inferential knowledge.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-25T18:35:45Z)
• Thought-Like-Pro: Enhancing Reasoning of Large Language Models through Self-Driven Prolog-based Chain-of-Thought [31.964412924094656]
  Large language models (LLMs) have shown exceptional performance as general-purpose assistants. We introduce a novel learning framework, THOUGHT-LIKE-PRO, to facilitate learning and generalization across diverse reasoning tasks. Our empirical findings indicate that our proposed approach substantially enhances the reasoning abilities of LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-18T18:52:10Z)
• LogicAsker: Evaluating and Improving the Logical Reasoning Ability of Large Language Models [63.14196038655506]
  We introduce LogicAsker, a novel approach for evaluating and enhancing the logical reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs) Our methodology reveals significant gaps in LLMs' learning of logical rules, with identified reasoning failures ranging from 29% to 90% across different models. We leverage these findings to construct targeted demonstration examples and fine-tune data, notably enhancing logical reasoning in models like GPT-4o by up to 5%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-01T13:53:53Z)
• Are LLMs Rigorous Logical Reasoner? Empowering Natural Language Proof Generation with Contrastive Stepwise Decoding [11.385103498440932]
  We introduce contrastive decoding to stepwise proof generation, making use of negative reasoning paths to strengthen the model's capacity for logical deduction. Experiments on EntailmentBank underscore the success of our method in augmenting the proof planning abilities of language models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-12T05:12:49Z)
• Towards LogiGLUE: A Brief Survey and A Benchmark for Analyzing Logical Reasoning Capabilities of Language Models [56.34029644009297]
  Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated the ability to overcome various limitations of formal Knowledge Representation (KR) systems. LLMs excel most in abductive reasoning, followed by deductive reasoning, while they are least effective at inductive reasoning. We study single-task training, multi-task training, and "chain-of-thought" knowledge distillation fine-tuning technique to assess the performance of model.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-02T01:00:50Z)
• Modeling Hierarchical Reasoning Chains by Linking Discourse Units and Key Phrases for Reading Comprehension [80.99865844249106]
  We propose a holistic graph network (HGN) which deals with context at both discourse level and word level, as the basis for logical reasoning. Specifically, node-level and type-level relations, which can be interpreted as bridges in the reasoning process, are modeled by a hierarchical interaction mechanism.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-21T07:34:27Z)
• Exploring Self-supervised Logic-enhanced Training for Large Language Models [59.227222647741094]
  In this paper, we make the first attempt to investigate the feasibility of incorporating logical knowledge through self-supervised post-training. We devise an auto-regressive objective variant of MERIt and integrate it with two LLM series, i.e., FLAN-T5 and LLaMA, with parameter size ranging from 3 billion to 13 billion. The results on two challenging logical reasoning benchmarks demonstrate the effectiveness of LogicLLM.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-23T06:13:10Z)
• Improved Logical Reasoning of Language Models via Differentiable Symbolic Programming [12.984852480664378]
  Pre-trained large language models (LMs) struggle to perform logical reasoning reliably despite advances in scale and compositionality. We propose DSR-LM, a Differentiable Symbolic Reasoning framework where pre-trained LMs govern the perception of factual knowledge, and a symbolic module performs deductive reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-05T07:24:46Z)
• Discourse-Aware Graph Networks for Textual Logical Reasoning [142.0097357999134]
  Passage-level logical relations represent entailment or contradiction between propositional units (e.g., a concluding sentence) We propose logic structural-constraint modeling to solve the logical reasoning QA and introduce discourse-aware graph networks (DAGNs) The networks first construct logic graphs leveraging in-line discourse connectives and generic logic theories, then learn logic representations by end-to-end evolving the logic relations with an edge-reasoning mechanism and updating the graph features.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-07-04T14:38:49Z)
• LogiGAN: Learning Logical Reasoning via Adversarial Pre-training [58.11043285534766]
  We present LogiGAN, an unsupervised adversarial pre-training framework for improving logical reasoning abilities of language models. Inspired by the facilitation effect of reflective thinking in human learning, we simulate the learning-thinking process with an adversarial Generator-Verifier architecture. Both base and large size language models pre-trained with LogiGAN demonstrate obvious performance improvement on 12 datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-18T08:46:49Z)

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.