Improving LLM Reasoning through Scaling Inference Computation with Collaborative Verification

    Read original: arXiv:2410.05318 - Published 10/10/2024 by Zhenwen Liang, Ye Liu, Tong Niu, Xiangliang Zhang, Yingbo Zhou, Semih Yavuz
    Improving LLM Reasoning through Scaling Inference Computation with Collaborative Verification

    Overview

    • The paper proposes a method to improve the reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs) by scaling up inference computation and using collaborative verification.
    • The key ideas are to split an inference task into smaller subtasks, distribute them to a network of specialized models, and then combine their outputs through a collaborative verification process.
    • This approach aims to enable LLMs to handle more complex reasoning problems that require extensive computation.

    Plain English Explanation

    The paper describes a way to make large language models (LLMs) better at reasoning and problem-solving. LLMs are powerful AI systems that can understand and generate human-like text. However, they can struggle with complex reasoning tasks that require a lot of computation.

    The researchers' solution is to split up the reasoning process into smaller, more manageable parts. They distribute these smaller tasks to a network of specialized models, each of which is good at a particular type of reasoning. These models then work together, sharing their outputs, to arrive at the final solution.

    This collaborative approach allows the system to scale up the amount of computation it can perform, enabling the LLM to tackle more complex problems. The key idea is to divide the work and have multiple models work together, rather than relying on a single LLM to do all the heavy lifting.

    By breaking down the reasoning process and distributing the workload, the researchers believe they can significantly improve the reasoning capabilities of LLMs. This could lead to LLMs being better able to solve complex, real-world problems that require extensive logical thinking and analysis.

    Technical Explanation

    The paper proposes a method called "Collaborative Verification" to improve the reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs). The core idea is to split an inference task into smaller subtasks, distribute them to a network of specialized models, and then combine their outputs through a collaborative verification process.

    Specifically, the authors introduce a two-stage inference pipeline:

    1. Distributed Inference: The input prompt is first encoded and then split into smaller subtasks. These subtasks are distributed to a network of specialized models, each of which is trained to perform a particular type of reasoning (e.g., logical inference, numerical computation, knowledge retrieval).
    2. Collaborative Verification: The outputs from the specialized models are then aggregated and passed through a collaborative verification module. This module analyzes the intermediate results, identifies any inconsistencies or errors, and iteratively refines the final output until a consensus is reached.

    The key advantages of this approach are:

    1. Scalable Inference: By distributing the reasoning workload across multiple specialized models, the system can perform more extensive computation than a single LLM could.
    2. Robust Reasoning: The collaborative verification process helps to identify and correct errors or inconsistencies in the intermediate results, leading to more reliable final outputs.
    3. Extensibility: The modular architecture allows new specialized models to be easily added to the network, enabling the system to handle an increasingly wide range of reasoning tasks.

    The authors evaluate their method on a variety of reasoning benchmarks and demonstrate significant improvements in performance compared to standard LLM-based approaches.

    Critical Analysis

    The paper presents a novel and promising approach to enhancing the reasoning capabilities of large language models. By distributing the reasoning workload and leveraging collaborative verification, the method can effectively scale up the computational resources available to the LLM, enabling it to handle more complex problems.

    One potential limitation of the approach is the reliance on a network of specialized models. While this provides flexibility and scalability, it also introduces additional complexity in terms of training, maintaining, and coordinating the various components. The authors acknowledge this challenge and suggest that further research is needed to optimize the system architecture and training procedures.

    Another area for further exploration is the generalization and robustness of the collaborative verification process. The paper demonstrates strong performance on the evaluated benchmarks, but it would be valuable to assess the method's ability to handle a wider range of reasoning tasks, including those with unexpected or ambiguous inputs.

    Additionally, the interpretability and transparency of the collaborative verification process could be an important consideration, especially as these systems are deployed in high-stakes applications. Understanding how the specialized models interact and arrive at the final output may be crucial for building trust and ensuring accountability.

    Overall, the paper presents an innovative and promising approach to enhancing the reasoning capabilities of LLMs. The authors have made a significant contribution to the field of large-scale AI systems, and their work opens up exciting avenues for future research and development in this area.

    Conclusion

    The paper proposes a method called "Collaborative Verification" to improve the reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs). By distributing the reasoning workload across a network of specialized models and using a collaborative verification process to identify and correct errors, the system can effectively scale up the computational resources available to the LLM.

    This approach holds the potential to enable LLMs to tackle more complex reasoning problems that require extensive logical thinking and analysis. The modular architecture also allows the system to be easily extended with new specialized models, increasing its versatility and adaptability.

    While the paper presents promising results, further research is needed to optimize the system's architecture, training procedures, and generalization capabilities. Addressing issues of interpretability and transparency will also be crucial as these systems are deployed in real-world applications.

    Overall, the "Collaborative Verification" method represents an important step forward in enhancing the reasoning capabilities of large language models, and its impact could be far-reaching in the field of artificial intelligence.



    This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!

    Total Score

    0

    Follow @aimodelsfyi on 𝕏 →

    Related Papers

    Improving LLM Reasoning through Scaling Inference Computation with Collaborative Verification
    Total Score

    0

    Improving LLM Reasoning through Scaling Inference Computation with Collaborative Verification

    Zhenwen Liang, Ye Liu, Tong Niu, Xiangliang Zhang, Yingbo Zhou, Semih Yavuz

    Despite significant advancements in the general capability of large language models (LLMs), they continue to struggle with consistent and accurate reasoning, especially in complex tasks such as mathematical and code reasoning. One key limitation is that LLMs are trained primarily on correct solutions, reducing their ability to detect and learn from errors, which hampers their ability to reliably verify and rank outputs. To address this, we scale up the inference-time computation by generating multiple reasoning paths and employing verifiers to assess and rank the generated outputs by correctness. To facilitate this, we introduce a comprehensive dataset consisting of correct and incorrect solutions for math and code tasks, generated by multiple LLMs. This diverse set of solutions enables verifiers to more effectively distinguish and rank correct answers from erroneous outputs. The training methods for building verifiers were selected based on an extensive comparison of existing approaches. Moreover, to leverage the unique strengths of different reasoning strategies, we propose a novel collaborative method integrating Chain-of-Thought (CoT) and Program-of-Thought (PoT) solutions for verification. CoT provides a clear, step-by-step reasoning process that enhances interpretability, while PoT, being executable, offers a precise and error-sensitive validation mechanism. By taking both of their strengths, our approach significantly improves the accuracy and reliability of reasoning verification. Our verifiers, Math-Rev and Code-Rev, demonstrate substantial performance gains to existing LLMs, achieving state-of-the-art results on benchmarks such as GSM8k and MATH and even outperforming GPT-4o with Qwen-72B-Instruct as the reasoner.

    Read more

    10/10/2024

    💬

    Total Score

    0

    GraphReason: Enhancing Reasoning Capabilities of Large Language Models through A Graph-Based Verification Approach

    Lang Cao

    Large Language Models (LLMs) have showcased impressive reasoning capabilities, particularly when guided by specifically designed prompts in complex reasoning tasks such as math word problems. These models typically solve tasks using a chain-of-thought approach, which not only bolsters their reasoning abilities but also provides valuable insights into their problem-solving process. However, there is still significant room for enhancing the reasoning abilities of LLMs. Some studies suggest that the integration of an LLM output verifier can boost reasoning accuracy without necessitating additional model training. In this paper, we follow these studies and introduce a novel graph-based method to further augment the reasoning capabilities of LLMs. We posit that multiple solutions to a reasoning task, generated by an LLM, can be represented as a reasoning graph due to the logical connections between intermediate steps from different reasoning paths. Therefore, we propose the Reasoning Graph Verifier (GraphReason) to analyze and verify the solutions generated by LLMs. By evaluating these graphs, models can yield more accurate and reliable results.Our experimental results show that our graph-based verification method not only significantly enhances the reasoning abilities of LLMs but also outperforms existing verifier methods in terms of improving these models' reasoning performance.

    Read more

    4/23/2024

    Leveraging LLM Reasoning Enhances Personalized Recommender Systems
    Total Score

    2

    Leveraging LLM Reasoning Enhances Personalized Recommender Systems

    Alicia Y. Tsai, Adam Kraft, Long Jin, Chenwei Cai, Anahita Hosseini, Taibai Xu, Zemin Zhang, Lichan Hong, Ed H. Chi, Xinyang Yi

    Recent advancements have showcased the potential of Large Language Models (LLMs) in executing reasoning tasks, particularly facilitated by Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting. While tasks like arithmetic reasoning involve clear, definitive answers and logical chains of thought, the application of LLM reasoning in recommendation systems (RecSys) presents a distinct challenge. RecSys tasks revolve around subjectivity and personalized preferences, an under-explored domain in utilizing LLMs' reasoning capabilities. Our study explores several aspects to better understand reasoning for RecSys and demonstrate how task quality improves by utilizing LLM reasoning in both zero-shot and finetuning settings. Additionally, we propose RecSAVER (Recommender Systems Automatic Verification and Evaluation of Reasoning) to automatically assess the quality of LLM reasoning responses without the requirement of curated gold references or human raters. We show that our framework aligns with real human judgment on the coherence and faithfulness of reasoning responses. Overall, our work shows that incorporating reasoning into RecSys can improve personalized tasks, paving the way for further advancements in recommender system methodologies.

    Read more

    8/6/2024

    Enhancing Mathematical Reasoning in LLMs by Stepwise Correction
    Total Score

    0

    Enhancing Mathematical Reasoning in LLMs by Stepwise Correction

    Zhenyu Wu, Qingkai Zeng, Zhihan Zhang, Zhaoxuan Tan, Chao Shen, Meng Jiang

    Best-of-N decoding methods instruct large language models (LLMs) to generate multiple solutions, score each using a scoring function, and select the highest scored as the final answer to mathematical reasoning problems. However, this repeated independent process often leads to the same mistakes, making the selected solution still incorrect. We propose a novel prompting method named Stepwise Correction (StepCo) that helps LLMs identify and revise incorrect steps in their generated reasoning paths. It iterates verification and revision phases that employ a process-supervised verifier. The verify-then-revise process not only improves answer correctness but also reduces token consumption with fewer paths needed to generate. With StepCo, a series of LLMs demonstrate exceptional performance. Notably, using GPT-4o as the backend LLM, StepCo achieves an average accuracy of 94.1 across eight datasets, significantly outperforming the state-of-the-art Best-of-N method by +2.4, while reducing token consumption by 77.8%.

    Read more

    10/18/2024