Diversity of Thought Elicits Stronger Reasoning Capabilities in Multi-Agent Debate Frameworks

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2410.12853v1
• Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2024 21:59:01 GMT
• Title: Diversity of Thought Elicits Stronger Reasoning Capabilities in Multi-Agent Debate Frameworks
• Authors: Mahmood Hegazy,
• Abstract summary: Chain-of-thought prompting, self-verification, and multi-agent debate are proposed to improve the reasoning and factual accuracy of large language models. We find that multi-agent debate helps at any model scale, and that diversity of thought elicits stronger reasoning in debating LLMs.
• Score: 0.0
• License:
• Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) excel in natural language generation but often confidently produce incorrect responses, especially in tasks like mathematical reasoning. Chain-of-thought prompting, self-verification, and multi-agent debate are among the strategies proposed to improve the reasoning and factual accuracy of LLMs. Building on Du et al.'s multi-agent debate framework, we find that multi-agent debate helps at any model scale, and that diversity of thought elicits stronger reasoning in debating LLMs. Across various model sizes, performance on mathematical reasoning tasks benefits most when diverse trained models are used. Remarkably, after 4 rounds of debate, a diverse set of medium-capacity models (Gemini-Pro, Mixtral 7BX8, and PaLM 2-M) outperforms GPT-4 on the GSM-8K benchmark, scoring 91% accuracy. By comparison, when 3 instances of Gemini-Pro are used, performance only reaches 82%. Finally, this diverse set of medium-capacity models sets a new state-of-the-art performance on the ASDiv benchmark (94%). These results underscore the idea that the future of AI is agentic, with diverse cooperating agents yielding emergent capabilities beyond even the most powerful individual models.

Related papers

• Enhancing the Reasoning Ability of Multimodal Large Language Models via Mixed Preference Optimization [65.64108848398696]
  We introduce a preference optimization process to enhance the multimodal reasoning capabilities of MLLMs. We develop a simple yet effective method, termed Mixed Preference Optimization (MPO), which boosts multimodal CoT performance. Our model, InternVL2-8B-MPO, achieves an accuracy of 67.0 on MathVista, outperforming InternVL2-8B by 8.7 points and achieving performance comparable to the 10x larger InternVL2-76B.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-15T18:59:27Z)
• MultiAgent Collaboration Attack: Investigating Adversarial Attacks in Large Language Model Collaborations via Debate [24.92465108034783]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown exceptional results on current benchmarks when working individually. The advancement in their capabilities, along with a reduction in parameter size and inference times, has facilitated the use of these models as agents. We evaluate the behavior of a network of models collaborating through debate under the influence of an adversary.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-20T20:09:37Z)
• How Easy is It to Fool Your Multimodal LLMs? An Empirical Analysis on Deceptive Prompts [54.07541591018305]
  We present MAD-Bench, a benchmark that contains 1000 test samples divided into 5 categories, such as non-existent objects, count of objects, and spatial relationship. We provide a comprehensive analysis of popular MLLMs, ranging from GPT-4v, Reka, Gemini-Pro, to open-sourced models, such as LLaVA-NeXT and MiniCPM-Llama3. While GPT-4o achieves 82.82% accuracy on MAD-Bench, the accuracy of any other model in our experiments ranges from 9% to 50%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-20T18:31:27Z)
• Combating Adversarial Attacks with Multi-Agent Debate [4.450536872346658]
  We implement multi-agent debate between current state-of-the-art language models and evaluate models' susceptibility to red team attacks. We find that multi-agent debate can reduce model toxicity when jailbroken or less capable models are forced to debate with non-jailbroken or more capable models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-11T15:57:38Z)
• MR-GSM8K: A Meta-Reasoning Benchmark for Large Language Model Evaluation [60.65820977963331]
  We introduce a novel evaluation paradigm for Large Language Models (LLMs) This paradigm shifts the emphasis from result-oriented assessments, which often neglect the reasoning process, to a more comprehensive evaluation. By applying this paradigm in the GSM8K dataset, we have developed the MR-GSM8K benchmark.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-28T15:49:43Z)
• Mixed Distillation Helps Smaller Language Model Better Reasoning [27.934081882868902]
  We introduce Mixed Distillation (MD) framework, which capitalizes on the strengths of Program of Thought (PoT) and Chain of Thought (CoT) capabilities within large language models (LLMs) Our experimental results show that MD significantly enhances the single-path and multi-path reasoning ability of smaller models in various tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-17T14:28:28Z)
• MAgIC: Investigation of Large Language Model Powered Multi-Agent in Cognition, Adaptability, Rationality and Collaboration [102.41118020705876]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have marked a significant advancement in the field of natural language processing. As their applications extend into multi-agent environments, a need has arisen for a comprehensive evaluation framework. This work introduces a novel benchmarking framework specifically tailored to assess LLMs within multi-agent settings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-14T21:46:27Z)
• Diversifying the Mixture-of-Experts Representation for Language Models with Orthogonal Optimizer [59.43462055143123]
  The Mixture of Experts (MoE) has emerged as a highly successful technique in deep learning. In this study, we shed light on the homogeneous representation problem, wherein experts in the MoE fail to specialize and lack diversity. We propose an alternating training strategy that encourages each expert to update in a direction to the subspace spanned by other experts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-15T07:20:28Z)
• ReConcile: Round-Table Conference Improves Reasoning via Consensus among Diverse LLMs [61.07130026622437]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) still struggle with natural language reasoning tasks. Motivated by the society of minds, we propose ReConcile. A multi-model multi-agent framework designed as a round table conference among diverse LLM agents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-22T17:12:45Z)

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.