Two Heads Are Better Than One: Dual-Model Verbal Reflection at Inference-Time

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2502.19230v1
• Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2025 15:41:41 GMT
• Title: Two Heads Are Better Than One: Dual-Model Verbal Reflection at Inference-Time
• Authors: Jiazheng Li, Yuxiang Zhou, Junru Lu, Gladys Tyen, Lin Gui, Cesare Aloisi, Yulan He,
• Abstract summary: Large Language Models (LLMs) often struggle with complex reasoning scenarios.<n>We introduce a contrastive reflection synthesis pipeline that enhances the accuracy and depth of LLM-generated reflections.<n>We propose a dual-model reasoning framework within a verbal reinforcement learning paradigm.
• Score: 17.3254565018168
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
• Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) often struggle with complex reasoning scenarios. While preference optimization methods enhance reasoning performance through training, they often lack transparency in why one reasoning outcome is preferred over another. Verbal reflection techniques improve explainability but are limited in LLMs' critique and refinement capacity. To address these challenges, we introduce a contrastive reflection synthesis pipeline that enhances the accuracy and depth of LLM-generated reflections. We further propose a dual-model reasoning framework within a verbal reinforcement learning paradigm, decoupling inference-time self-reflection into specialized, trained models for reasoning critique and refinement. Extensive experiments show that our framework outperforms traditional preference optimization methods across all evaluation metrics. Our findings also show that "two heads are better than one", demonstrating that a collaborative Reasoner-Critic model achieves superior reasoning performance and transparency, compared to single-model approaches.

Related papers

• Think Deep, Think Fast: Investigating Efficiency of Verifier-free Inference-time-scaling Methods [39.89239733570008]
  This work conducts a comprehensive analysis of inference-time scaling methods for both reasoning and non-reasoning models. We find that non-reasoning models, even with an extremely high inference budget, still fall substantially behind reasoning models. For reasoning models, majority voting proves to be a robust inference strategy, generally competitive or outperforming other more sophisticated ITC methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-18T19:32:55Z)
• Stop Overthinking: A Survey on Efficient Reasoning for Large Language Models [54.04678363287392]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable capabilities in complex tasks. Recent advancements in OpenAI o1 and DeepSeek-R1 have further improved performance in System-2 reasoning domains.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-20T17:59:38Z)
• Satori: Reinforcement Learning with Chain-of-Action-Thought Enhances LLM Reasoning via Autoregressive Search [57.28671084993782]
  Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable reasoning capabilities across diverse domains.<n>Recent studies have shown that increasing test-time computation enhances LLMs' reasoning capabilities.<n>We propose a two-stage training paradigm: 1) a small-scale format tuning stage to internalize the COAT reasoning format and 2) a large-scale self-improvement stage leveraging reinforcement learning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-04T17:26:58Z)
• BRiTE: Bootstrapping Reinforced Thinking Process to Enhance Language Model Reasoning [78.63421517563056]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable capabilities in complex reasoning tasks.<n>We present a unified probabilistic framework that formalizes LLM reasoning through a novel graphical model.<n>We introduce the Bootstrapping Reinforced Thinking Process (BRiTE) algorithm, which works in two steps.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-31T02:39:07Z)
• 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.<n>We propose a straightforward, generalizable, and low-complexity demonstration selection method named LMS3.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-11T11:38:11Z)
• Vision-Language Models Can Self-Improve Reasoning via Reflection [20.196406628954303]
  Chain-of-thought (CoT) has proven to improve the reasoning capability of large language models (LLMs) We propose a self-training framework, R3V, which iteratively enhances the model's Vision-language Reasoning by Reflecting on CoT Rationales. Our approach supports self-reflection on generated solutions, further boosting performance through test-time computation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-30T14:45:00Z)
• PRefLexOR: Preference-based Recursive Language Modeling for Exploratory Optimization of Reasoning and Agentic Thinking [0.0]
  PRefLexOR combines preference optimization with concepts from Reinforcement Learning to enable models to self-teach. We focus on applications in biological materials science and demonstrate the method in a variety of case studies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-16T08:46:26Z)
• Reflective Instruction Tuning: Mitigating Hallucinations in Large Vision-Language Models [36.119299938503936]
  Large vision-language models (LVLMs) have shown promising performance on a variety of vision-language tasks. They remain susceptible to hallucinations, generating outputs misaligned with visual content or instructions. We propose reflective instruction tuning, which integrates rationale learning into visual instruction tuning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-16T06:32:45Z)
• LLMs-as-Instructors: Learning from Errors Toward Automating Model Improvement [93.38736019287224]
  "LLMs-as-Instructors" framework autonomously enhances the training of smaller target models. Inspired by the theory of "Learning from Errors", this framework employs an instructor LLM to meticulously analyze the specific errors within a target model. Within this framework, we implement two strategies: "Learning from Error," which focuses solely on incorrect responses to tailor training data, and "Learning from Error by Contrast", which uses contrastive learning to analyze both correct and incorrect responses for a deeper understanding of errors.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-29T17:16:04Z)
• Learning From Correctness Without Prompting Makes LLM Efficient Reasoner [30.203952806009717]
  Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated outstanding performance across various tasks, yet they still exhibit limitations such as hallucination, unfaithful reasoning, and toxic content. We introduce an intrinsic self-correct reasoning framework for LLMs that eliminates the need for human feedback, external tools, and handcraft prompts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-28T02:12:49Z)
• Faithful Explanations of Black-box NLP Models Using LLM-generated Counterfactuals [67.64770842323966]
  Causal explanations of predictions of NLP systems are essential to ensure safety and establish trust. Existing methods often fall short of explaining model predictions effectively or efficiently. We propose two approaches for counterfactual (CF) approximation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-01T07:31:04Z)

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.