Thought-Path Contrastive Learning via Premise-Oriented Data Augmentation for Logical Reading Comprehension

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2409.14495v2
• Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2024 07:00:24 GMT
• Title: Thought-Path Contrastive Learning via Premise-Oriented Data Augmentation for Logical Reading Comprehension
• Authors: Chenxu Wang, Ping Jian, Zhen Yang,
• Abstract summary: Previous research has primarily focused on enhancing logical reasoning capabilities through Chain-of-Thought (CoT) or data augmentation. We propose a Premise-Oriented Data Augmentation (PODA) framework to generate CoT rationales including analyses for both correct and incorrect options. We also introduce a novel thought-path contrastive learning method that compares reasoning paths between the original and counterfactual samples.
• Score: 9.67774998354062
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Logical reading comprehension is a challenging task that entails grasping the underlying semantics of text and applying reasoning to deduce the correct answer. Prior researches have primarily focused on enhancing logical reasoning capabilities through Chain-of-Thought (CoT) or data augmentation. However, previous work constructing chain-of-thought rationales concentrates solely on analyzing correct options, neglecting the incorrect alternatives. Addtionally, earlier efforts on data augmentation by altering contexts rely on rule-based methods, which result in generated contexts that lack diversity and coherence. To address these issues, we propose a Premise-Oriented Data Augmentation (PODA) framework. This framework can generate CoT rationales including analyses for both correct and incorrect options, while constructing diverse and high-quality counterfactual contexts from incorrect candidate options. We integrate summarizing premises and identifying premises for each option into rationales. Subsequently, we employ multi-step prompts with identified premises to construct counterfactual context. To facilitate the model's capabilities to better differentiate the reasoning process associated with each option, we introduce a novel thought-path contrastive learning method that compares reasoning paths between the original and counterfactual samples. Experimental results on three representative LLMs demonstrate that our method can improve the baselines substantially across two challenging logical reasoning benchmarks (ReClor and LogiQA 2.0). The data and code are released at https://github.com/lalalamdbf/TPReasoner.

Related papers

• 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)
• Instance-adaptive Zero-shot Chain-of-Thought Prompting [32.700073951068575]
  Zero-shot Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting emerges as a simple and effective strategy for enhancing the performance of large language models (LLMs) in real-world reasoning tasks. This work introduces an instance-adaptive prompting algorithm as an alternative zero-shot CoT reasoning scheme by adaptively differentiating good and bad prompts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-30T16:00:34Z)
• H-STAR: LLM-driven Hybrid SQL-Text Adaptive Reasoning on Tables [56.73919743039263]
  This paper introduces a novel algorithm that integrates both symbolic and semantic (textual) approaches in a two-stage process to address limitations. Our experiments demonstrate that H-STAR significantly outperforms state-of-the-art methods across three question-answering (QA) and fact-verification datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-29T21:24:19Z)
• Learning to Correct for QA Reasoning with Black-box LLMs [37.13135300208977]
  We propose CoBB (Correct for improving QA reasoning of Black-Box LLMs) as an open challenge in machine learning. It uses a trained adaptation model to perform a seq2seq mapping from the often-imperfect reasonings of the original black-box LLM to the correct or improved reasonings. Our experimental results demonstrate that CoBB significantly improves reasoning accuracy across various QA benchmarks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-26T18:57:32Z)
• Mitigating Boundary Ambiguity and Inherent Bias for Text Classification in the Era of Large Language Models [24.085614720512744]
  This study shows that large language models (LLMs) are vulnerable to changes in the number and arrangement of options in text classification. Key bottleneck arises from ambiguous decision boundaries and inherent biases towards specific tokens and positions. Our approach is grounded in the empirical observation that pairwise comparisons can effectively alleviate boundary ambiguity and inherent bias.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-11T06:53:19Z)
• FiDeLiS: Faithful Reasoning in Large Language Model for Knowledge Graph Question Answering [46.41364317172677]
  We propose a retrieval augmented reasoning method, FiDeLiS, which enhances knowledge graph question answering. FiDeLiS uses a keyword-enhanced retrieval mechanism that fetches relevant entities and relations from a vector-based index of KGs. A distinctive feature of our approach is its blend of natural language planning with beam search to optimize the selection of reasoning paths.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-22T17:56:53Z)
• Information Re-Organization Improves Reasoning in Large Language Models [22.2946033364035]
  We propose an information re-organization (InfoRE) method to enhance the reasoning ability of large language models (LLMs) Our method involves extracting logical relationships from the contextual content, such as documents or paragraphs, and subsequently pruning redundant content to minimize noise. To demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach in improving the reasoning ability, we conduct experiments using Llama2-70B, GPT-3.5, and GPT-4 on various contextually aware multi-hop reasoning tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-22T08:47:27Z)
• LaRS: Latent Reasoning Skills for Chain-of-Thought Reasoning [61.7853049843921]
  Chain-of-thought (CoT) prompting is a popular in-context learning approach for large language models (LLMs) This paper introduces a new approach named Latent Reasoning Skills (LaRS) that employs unsupervised learning to create a latent space representation of rationales.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-07T20:36:10Z)
• DetermLR: Augmenting LLM-based Logical Reasoning from Indeterminacy to Determinacy [76.58614128865652]
  We propose DetermLR, a novel perspective that rethinks the reasoning process as an evolution from indeterminacy to determinacy. First, we categorize known conditions into two types: determinate and indeterminate premises This provides an oveall direction for the reasoning process and guides LLMs in converting indeterminate data into progressively determinate insights. We automate the storage and extraction of available premises and reasoning paths with reasoning memory, preserving historical reasoning details for subsequent reasoning steps.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-28T10:05:51Z)
• APOLLO: A Simple Approach for Adaptive Pretraining of Language Models for Logical Reasoning [73.3035118224719]
  We propose APOLLO, an adaptively pretrained language model that has improved logical reasoning abilities. APOLLO performs comparably on ReClor and outperforms baselines on LogiQA.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-19T07:40:02Z)
• MURMUR: Modular Multi-Step Reasoning for Semi-Structured Data-to-Text Generation [102.20036684996248]
  We propose MURMUR, a neuro-symbolic modular approach to text generation from semi-structured data with multi-step reasoning. We conduct experiments on two data-to-text generation tasks like WebNLG and LogicNLG.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-16T17:36:23Z)

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.