NYT-Connections: A Deceptively Simple Text Classification Task that Stumps System-1 Thinkers

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2412.01621v3
• Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2025 12:59:42 GMT
• Title: NYT-Connections: A Deceptively Simple Text Classification Task that Stumps System-1 Thinkers
• Authors: Angel Yahir Loredo Lopez, Tyler McDonald, Ali Emami,
• Abstract summary: We present NYT-Connections, a collection of 358 simple word classification puzzles derived from the New York Times Connections game.<n>This benchmark is designed to penalize quick, intuitive "System 1" thinking, isolating fundamental reasoning skills.
• Score: 5.397565689903148
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown impressive performance on various benchmarks, yet their ability to engage in deliberate reasoning remains questionable. We present NYT-Connections, a collection of 358 simple word classification puzzles derived from the New York Times Connections game. This benchmark is designed to penalize quick, intuitive "System 1" thinking, isolating fundamental reasoning skills. We evaluated six recent LLMs, a simple machine learning heuristic, and humans across three configurations: single-attempt, multiple attempts without hints, and multiple attempts with contextual hints. Our findings reveal a significant performance gap: even top-performing LLMs like GPT-4 fall short of human performance by nearly 30%. Notably, advanced prompting techniques such as Chain-of-Thought and Self-Consistency show diminishing returns as task difficulty increases. NYT-Connections uniquely combines linguistic isolation, resistance to intuitive shortcuts, and regular updates to mitigate data leakage, offering a novel tool for assessing LLM reasoning capabilities.

Related papers

• LongPerceptualThoughts: Distilling System-2 Reasoning for System-1 Perception [105.78609483419115]
  We introduce LongPerceptualThoughts, a new synthetic dataset with 30K long-thought traces for perceptual tasks. We propose a novel three-stage data synthesis framework that first synthesizes verifiable multiple-choice questions. We demonstrate notable improvements over existing visual reasoning data-generation methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-21T18:10:38Z)
• Sketch-of-Thought: Efficient LLM Reasoning with Adaptive Cognitive-Inspired Sketching [60.04718679054704]
  We introduce Sketch-of-Thought (SoT), a novel prompting framework. It combines cognitive-inspired reasoning paradigms with linguistic constraints to minimize token usage. SoT achieves token reductions of 76% with negligible accuracy impact.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-07T06:57:17Z)
• Unveiling the Magic of Code Reasoning through Hypothesis Decomposition and Amendment [54.62926010621013]
  We introduce a novel task, code reasoning, to provide a new perspective for the reasoning abilities of large language models. We summarize three meta-benchmarks based on established forms of logical reasoning, and instantiate these into eight specific benchmark tasks. We present a new pathway exploration pipeline inspired by human intricate problem-solving methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-17T10:39:58Z)
• What Makes In-context Learning Effective for Mathematical Reasoning: A Theoretical Analysis [81.15503859645149]
  In this paper, we aim to theoretically analyze the impact of in-context demonstrations on large language models' reasoning performance. We propose a straightforward, generalizable, and low-complexity demonstration selection method named LMS3.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-11T11:38:11Z)
• LLM The Genius Paradox: A Linguistic and Math Expert's Struggle with Simple Word-based Counting Problems [28.72485319617863]
  LLMs struggle with some basic tasks that humans find trivial to handle, e.g., counting the number of character r's in the wordstrawberry. We measure transferability of advanced mathematical and coding reasoning capabilities from specialized LLMs to simple counting tasks. Compared with strategies such as finetuning and in-context learning, we show that engaging reasoning is the most robust and efficient way to help LLMs better perceive tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-18T04:17:16Z)
• Do LLMs Overcome Shortcut Learning? An Evaluation of Shortcut Challenges in Large Language Models [9.854718405054589]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown remarkable capabilities in various natural language processing tasks. This paper presents Shortcut Suite, a test suite designed to evaluate the impact of shortcuts on LLMs' performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-17T08:52:52Z)
• AutoDetect: Towards a Unified Framework for Automated Weakness Detection in Large Language Models [95.09157454599605]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are becoming increasingly powerful, but they still exhibit significant but subtle weaknesses. Traditional benchmarking approaches cannot thoroughly pinpoint specific model deficiencies. We introduce a unified framework, AutoDetect, to automatically expose weaknesses in LLMs across various tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-24T15:16:45Z)
• Optimizing Language Model's Reasoning Abilities with Weak Supervision [48.60598455782159]
  We present textscPuzzleBen, a weakly supervised benchmark that comprises 25,147 complex questions, answers, and human-generated rationales. A unique aspect of our dataset is the inclusion of 10,000 unannotated questions, enabling us to explore utilizing fewer supersized data to boost LLMs' inference capabilities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-07T07:39:15Z)
• Intention Analysis Makes LLMs A Good Jailbreak Defender [79.4014719271075]
  In this study, we present a simple yet highly effective defense strategy, i.e., Intention Analysis ($mathbbIA$) The principle behind this is to trigger LLMs' inherent self-correct and improve ability through a two-stage process. $mathbbIA$ is an inference-only method, thus could enhance the safety of LLMs without compromising their helpfulness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-12T13:15:05Z)
• MuSR: Testing the Limits of Chain-of-thought with Multistep Soft Reasoning [63.80739044622555]
  We introduce MuSR, a dataset for evaluating language models on soft reasoning tasks specified in a natural language narrative. This dataset has two crucial features. First, it is created through a novel neurosymbolic synthetic-to-natural generation algorithm. Second, our dataset instances are free text narratives corresponding to real-world domains of reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-24T17:59:20Z)
• ReWOO: Decoupling Reasoning from Observations for Efficient Augmented Language Models [32.95155349925248]
  We propose a modular paradigm ReWOO that detaches the reasoning process from external observations, thus significantly reducing token consumption. We show that ReWOO achieves 5x token efficiency and 4% accuracy improvement on HotpotQA, a multi-step reasoning benchmark. Our illustrative work offloads reasoning ability from 175B GPT3.5 into 7B LLaMA, demonstrating the significant potential for truly efficient and scalable ALM systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-23T00:16:48Z)
• Large Language Models are Better Reasoners with Self-Verification [48.534270563880845]
  Large language models (LLMs) have shown strong reasoning ability in several natural language processing tasks. LLMs with chain of thought (CoT) prompting require multi-step prompting and multi-token prediction, which is highly sensitive to individual mistakes. We propose and prove that LLMs also have similar self-verification abilities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-19T15:51:52Z)

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.