Large Language Models (LLMs) can achieve strong performance on many tasks by producing step-by-step reasoning before giving a final output, often referred to as chain-of-thought reasoning (CoT). It is tempting to interpret these CoT explanations as the LLM’s process for solving a task. This level of transparency into LLMs’ predictions would yield significant safety benefits. However, we find that CoT explanations can systematically misrepresent the true reason for a model’s prediction. We demonstrate that CoT explanations can be heavily influenced by adding biasing features to model inputs—e.g., by reordering the multiple-choice options in a few-shot prompt to make the answer always “(A)”—which models systematically fail to mention in their explanations. When we bias models toward incorrect answers, they frequently generate CoT explanations rationalizing those answers. This causes accuracy to drop by as much as 36% on a suite of 13 tasks from BIG-Bench Hard, when testing with GPT-3.5 from OpenAI and Claude 1.0 from Anthropic. On a social-bias task, model explanations justify giving answers in line with stereotypes without mentioning the influence of these social biases. Our findings indicate that CoT explanations can be plausible yet misleading, which risks increasing our trust in LLMs without guaranteeing their safety. Building more transparent and explainable systems will require either improving CoT faithfulness through targeted efforts or abandoning CoT in favor of alternative methods.
more »
« less
Faithful Chain-of-Thought Reasoning
While Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting boosts Language Models’ (LM) performance on a gamut of complex reasoning tasks, the generated reasoning chain does not necessarily reflect how the model arrives at the answer (aka. faithfulness). We propose Faithful CoT, a reasoning framework involving two stages: Translation (Natural Language query → symbolic reasoning chain) and Problem Solving (reasoning chain → answer), using an LM and a deterministic solver respectively. This guarantees that the reasoning chain provides a faithful explanation of the final answer. Aside from interpretability, Faithful CoT also improves empirical performance: it outperforms standard CoT on 9 of 10 benchmarks from 4 diverse domains, with a relative accuracy gain of 6.3% on Math Word Problems (MWP), 3.4% on Planning, 5.5% on Multi-hop Question Answering (QA), and 21.4% on Relational Inference. Furthermore, with GPT-4 and Codex, it sets the new state-of-the-art few-shot performance on 7 datasets (with 95.0+ accuracy on 6 of them), showing a strong synergy between faithfulness and accuracy.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1928474
- PAR ID:
- 10463284
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- The 13th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing and the 3rd Conference of the Asia-Pacific Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (IJCNLP-AACL 2023)
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Generating a chain of thought (CoT) can increase large language model (LLM) performance on a wide range of tasks. Zero-shot CoT evaluations, however, have been conducted primarily on logical tasks (e.g. arithmetic, commonsense QA). In this paper, we perform a controlled evaluation of zero-shot CoT across two sensitive domains: harmful questions and stereotype benchmarks. We find that using zero-shot CoT reasoning in a prompt can significantly increase a model's likelihood to produce undesirable output. Without future advances in alignment or explicit mitigation instructions, zero-shot CoT should be avoided on tasks where models can make inferences about marginalized groups or harmful topics.more » « less
-
Answering open-domain questions requires world knowledge about in-context entities. As pre-trained Language Models (LMs) lack the power to store all required knowledge, external knowledge sources, such as knowledge graphs, are often used to augment LMs. In this work, we propose knOwledge REasOning empowered Language Model (OREOLM), which consists of a novel Knowledge Interaction Layer that can be flexibly plugged into existing Transformer-based LMs to interact with a differentiable Knowledge Graph Reasoning module collaboratively. In this way, LM guides KG to walk towards the desired answer, while the retrieved knowledge improves LM. By adopting OREOLM to RoBERTa and T5, we show significant performance gain, achieving state-of-art results in the Closed-Book setting. The performance enhancement is mainly from the KG reasoning’s capacity to infer missing relational facts. In addition, OREOLM provides reasoning paths as rationales to interpret the model’s decision.more » « less
-
Despite the significant advancements in the field of Natural Language Processing (NLP), Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown limitations in performing complex tasks that require arithmetic, commonsense, and symbolic reasoning. Reasoning frameworks like ReAct, Chain-of-thought (CoT), Tree-of-thoughts (ToT), etc. have shown success but with limitations in solving long-form complex tasks. To address this, we propose a knowledge-sharing and collaborative multi-agent assisted framework on LLMs that leverages the capabilities of existing reasoning frameworks and the collaborative skills of multi-agent systems (MASs). The objectives of the proposed framework are to overcome the limitations of LLMs, enhance their reasoning capabilities, and improve their performance in complex tasks. It involves generating natural language rationales and in-context few-shot learning via prompting, and integrates the reasoning techniques with efficient knowledge-sharing and communication driven agent networks. The potential benefits of the proposed framework include saving time and money, improved efficiency for computationally intensive reasoning, and the ability to incorporate multiple collaboration strategies for dynamically changing environments.more » « less
-
Recent years have witnessed the emergence of a variety of post-hoc interpretations that aim to uncover how natural language processing (NLP) models make predictions. Despite the surge of new interpretation methods, it remains an open problem how to define and quantitatively measure the faithfulness of interpretations, i.e., to what extent interpretations reflect the reasoning process by a model. We propose two new criteria, sensitivity and stability, that provide complementary notions of faithfulness to the existed removal-based criteria. Our results show that the conclusion for how faithful interpretations are could vary substantially based on different notions. Motivated by the desiderata of sensitivity and stability, we introduce a new class of interpretation methods that adopt techniques from adversarial robustness. Empirical results show that our proposed methods are effective under the new criteria and overcome limitations of gradient-based methods on removal-based criteria. Besides text classification, we also apply interpretation methods and metrics to dependency parsing. Our results shed light on understanding the diverse set of interpretations.more » « less