Pretrained Language Models (LMs) have demonstrated ability to perform numerical reasoning by extrapolating from a few examples in few-shot settings. However, the extent to which this extrapolation relies on robust reasoning is unclear. In this paper, we investigate how well these models reason with terms that are less frequent in the pretraining data. In particular, we examine the correlations between the model performance on test instances and the frequency of terms from those instances in the pretraining data. We measure the strength of this correlation for a number of GPT-based language models (pretrained on the Pile dataset) on various numerical deduction tasks (e.g., arithmetic and unit conversion). Our results consistently demonstrate that models are more accurate on instances whose terms are more prevalent, in some cases above 70% (absolute) more accurate on the top 10% frequent terms in comparison to the bottom 10%. Overall, although LMs appear successful at few-shot numerical reasoning, our results raise the question of how much models actually generalize beyond pretraining data, and we encourage researchers to take the pretraining data into account when interpreting evaluation results.
more »
« less
This content will become publicly available on May 1, 2024
A minimalist dataset for systematic generalization of perception, syntax, and semantics
Inspired by humans’ exceptional ability to master arithmetic and generalize to new problems, we present a new dataset, Handwritten arithmetic with INTegers (HINT), to examine machines’ capability of learning generalizable concepts at three levels: perception, syntax, and semantics. In HINT, machines are tasked with learning how concepts are perceived from raw signals such as images (i.e., perception), how multiple concepts are structurally combined to form a valid expression (i.e., syntax), and how concepts are realized to afford various reasoning tasks (i.e., semantics), all in a weakly supervised manner. Focusing on systematic generalization, we carefully design a five-fold test set to evaluate both the interpolation and the extrapolation of learned concepts w.r.t. the three levels. Further, we design a few-shot learning split to determine whether or not models can rapidly learn new concepts and generalize them to more complex scenarios. To comprehend existing models’ limitations, we undertake extensive experiments with various sequence-to-sequence models, including RNNs, Transformers, and GPT-3 (with the chain of thought prompting). The results indicate that current models struggle to extrapolate to long-range syntactic dependency and semantics. Models exhibit a considerable gap toward human-level generalization when evaluated with new concepts in a few-shot setting. Moreover, we discover that it is infeasible to solve HINT by merely scaling up the dataset and the model size; this strategy contributes little to the extrapolation of syntax and semantics. Finally, in zero-shot GPT-3 experiments, the chain of thought prompting exhibits impressive results and significantly boosts the test accuracy. We believe the HINT dataset and the experimental findings are of great interest to the learning community on systematic generalization.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2015577
- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10469356
- Publisher / Repository:
- International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR 2023)
- Date Published:
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated an impressive ability to perform arithmetic and symbolic reasoning tasks, when provided with a few examples at test time ("few-shot prompting"). Much of this success can be attributed to prompting methods such as "chain-of-thought", which employ LLMs for both understanding the problem description by decomposing it into steps, as well as solving each step of the problem. While LLMs seem to be adept at this sort of step-by-step decomposition, LLMs often make logical and arithmetic mistakes in the solution part, even when the problem is decomposed correctly. In this paper, we present Program-Aided Language models (PAL): a novel approach that uses the LLM to read natural language problems and generate programs as the intermediate reasoning steps, but offloads the solution step to a runtime such as a Python interpreter. With PAL, decomposing the natural language problem into runnable steps remains the only learning task for the LLM, while solving is delegated to the interpreter. We demonstrate this synergy between a neural LLM and a symbolic interpreter across 13 mathematical, symbolic, and algorithmic reasoning tasks from BIG-Bench Hard and others. In all these natural language reasoning tasks, generating code using an LLM and reasoning using a Python interpreter leads to more accurate results than much larger models. For example, PAL using Codex achieves state-of-the-art few-shot accuracy on GSM8K, surpassing PaLM which uses chain-of-thought by absolute 15% top-1.more » « less
-
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
-
The abilities to form and abstract concepts is key to human intelligence, but such abilities remain lacking in state-of-the-art AI systems. There has been substantial research on conceptual abstraction in AI, particularly using idealized domains such as Raven's Progressive Matrices and Bongard problems, but even when AI systems succeed on such problems, the systems are rarely evaluated in depth to see if they have actually grasped the concepts they are meant to capture. In this paper we describe an in-depth evaluation benchmark for the Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus (ARC), a collection of few-shot abstraction and analogy problems developed by Chollet [2019]. In particular, we describe ConceptARC, a new, publicly available benchmark in the ARC domain that systematically assesses abstraction and generalization abilities on a number of basic spatial and semantic concepts. ConceptARC differs from the original ARC dataset in that it is specifically organized around "concept groups" -- sets of problems that focus on specific concepts and that are vary in complexity and level of abstraction. We report results on testing humans on this benchmark as well as three machine solvers: the top two programs from a 2021 ARC competition and OpenAI's GPT-4. Our results show that humans substantially outperform the machine solvers on this benchmark, showing abilities to abstract and generalize concepts that are not yet captured by AI systems. We believe that this benchmark will spur improvements in the development of AI systems for conceptual abstraction and in the effective evaluation of such systems.more » « less
-
Euclidean geometry is among the earliest forms of mathematical thinking. While the geometric primitives underlying its constructions, such as perfect lines and circles, do not often occur in the natural world, humans rarely struggle to perceive and reason with them. Will computer vision models trained on natural images show the same sensitivity to Euclidean geometry? Here we explore these questions by studying few-shot generalization in the universe of Euclidean geometry constructions. We introduce Geoclidean, a domain-specific language for Euclidean geometry, and use it to generate two datasets of geometric concept learning tasks for benchmarking generalization judgements of humans and machines. We find that humans are indeed sensitive to Euclidean geometry and generalize strongly from a few visual examples of a geometric concept. In contrast, low-level and high-level visual features from standard computer vision models pretrained on natural images do not support correct generalization. Thus Geoclidean represents a novel few-shot generalization benchmark for geometric concept learning, where the performance of humans and of AI models diverge. The Geoclidean framework and dataset are publicly available for download.more » « less
