MR-Ben: A Meta-Reasoning Benchmark for Evaluating System-2 Thinking in LLMs
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2406.13975v2
- Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2024 05:07:26 GMT
- Title: MR-Ben: A Meta-Reasoning Benchmark for Evaluating System-2 Thinking in LLMs
- Authors: Zhongshen Zeng, Yinhong Liu, Yingjia Wan, Jingyao Li, Pengguang Chen, Jianbo Dai, Yuxuan Yao, Rongwu Xu, Zehan Qi, Wanru Zhao, Linling Shen, Jianqiao Lu, Haochen Tan, Yukang Chen, Hao Zhang, Zhan Shi, Bailin Wang, Zhijiang Guo, Jiaya Jia,
- Abstract summary: Large language models (LLMs) have shown increasing capability in problem-solving and decision-making.
We present a process-based benchmark MR-Ben that demands a meta-reasoning skill.
Our meta-reasoning paradigm is especially suited for system-2 slow thinking.
- Score: 55.20845457594977
- License:
- Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have shown increasing capability in problem-solving and decision-making, largely based on the step-by-step chain-of-thought reasoning processes. However, evaluating these reasoning abilities has become increasingly challenging. Existing outcome-based benchmarks are beginning to saturate, becoming less effective in tracking meaningful progress. To address this, we present a process-based benchmark MR-Ben that demands a meta-reasoning skill, where LMs are asked to locate and analyse potential errors in automatically generated reasoning steps. Our meta-reasoning paradigm is especially suited for system-2 slow thinking, mirroring the human cognitive process of carefully examining assumptions, conditions, calculations, and logic to identify mistakes. MR-Ben comprises 5,975 questions curated by human experts across a wide range of subjects, including physics, chemistry, logic, coding, and more. Through our designed metrics for assessing meta-reasoning on this benchmark, we identify interesting limitations and weaknesses of current LLMs (open-source and closed-source models). For example, with models like the o1 series from OpenAI demonstrating strong performance by effectively scrutinizing the solution space, many other state-of-the-art models fall significantly behind on MR-Ben, exposing potential shortcomings in their training strategies and inference methodologies.
Related papers
- Weak-eval-Strong: Evaluating and Eliciting Lateral Thinking of LLMs with Situation Puzzles [20.18736445118689]
We introduce SPLAT, a benchmark leveraging Situation Puzzles to evaluate and elicit lateral thinking of Large Language Models (LLMs)
This benchmark, containing 975 graded situation puzzles across three difficulty levels, employs a new multi-turn player-judge framework instead of the traditional model-based evaluation.
Experiments demonstrate that a robust evaluation model, such as WizardLM-2, closely matches human judgements in both intermediate question-answering and final scenario accuracy.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-10-09T10:09:11Z) - ErrorRadar: Benchmarking Complex Mathematical Reasoning of Multimodal Large Language Models Via Error Detection [60.297079601066784]
We introduce ErrorRadar, the first benchmark designed to assess MLLMs' capabilities in error detection.
ErrorRadar evaluates two sub-tasks: error step identification and error categorization.
It consists of 2,500 high-quality multimodal K-12 mathematical problems, collected from real-world student interactions.
Results indicate significant challenges still remain, as GPT-4o with best performance is still around 10% behind human evaluation.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-10-06T14:59:09Z) - 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) - Robustness Assessment of Mathematical Reasoning in the Presence of Missing and Contradictory Conditions [48.251724997889184]
We develop a benchmark called Problems with Missing and Contradictory conditions (PMC)
We introduce two novel metrics to evaluate the performance of few-shot prompting methods in these scenarios.
We propose a novel few-shot prompting method called SMT-LIB Prompting (SLP), which utilizes the SMT-LIB language to model the problems instead of solving them directly.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-06-07T16:24:12Z) - 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) - Evaluating LLMs' Mathematical and Coding Competency through Ontology-guided Interventions [47.83142414018448]
We focus on two popular reasoning tasks: arithmetic reasoning and code generation.
We introduce (i) a general ontology of perturbations for math and coding questions, (ii) a semi-automatic method to apply these perturbations, and (iii) two datasets.
We show a significant performance drop across all the models against perturbed questions.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-01-17T18:13:07Z) - InfiMM-Eval: Complex Open-Ended Reasoning Evaluation For Multi-Modal
Large Language Models [50.03163753638256]
Multi-modal Large Language Models (MLLMs) are increasingly prominent in the field of artificial intelligence.
Our benchmark comprises three key reasoning categories: deductive, abductive, and analogical reasoning.
We evaluate a selection of representative MLLMs using this rigorously developed open-ended multi-step elaborate reasoning benchmark.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-11-20T07:06:31Z) - Beyond Task Performance: Evaluating and Reducing the Flaws of Large
Multimodal Models with In-Context Learning [105.77733287326308]
We evaluate 10 recent open-source LMMs from 3B up to 80B parameter scale, on 5 different axes; hallucinations, abstention, compositionality, explainability and instruction following.
We explore the training-free in-context learning (ICL) as a solution, and study how it affects these limitations.
Based on our ICL study, (3) we push ICL further and propose new multimodal ICL variants such as; Multitask-ICL, Chain-of-Hindsight-ICL, and Self-Correcting-ICL.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-10-01T12:02:59Z)
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.