REVIEW 2 cited by
Large Language Models can Learn Rules
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
When prompted with a few examples and intermediate steps, large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive performance in various reasoning tasks. However, prompting methods that rely on implicit knowledge in an LLM often generate incorrect answers when the implicit knowledge is wrong or inconsistent with the task. To tackle this problem, we present Hypotheses-to-Theories (HtT), a framework that learns a rule library for reasoning with LLMs. HtT contains two stages, an induction stage and a deduction stage. In the induction stage, an LLM is first asked to generate and verify rules over a set of training examples. Rules that appear and lead to correct answers sufficiently often are collected to form a rule library. In the deduction stage, the LLM is then prompted to employ the learned rule library to perform reasoning to answer test questions. Experiments on relational reasoning, numerical reasoning and concept learning problems show that HtT improves existing prompting methods, with an absolute gain of 10-30% in accuracy. The learned rules are also transferable to different models and to different forms of the same problem.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Interactive Reasoning: Visualizing and Controlling Chain-of-Thought Reasoning in Large Language Models
Interactive Reasoning, instantiated as Hippo, lets users view and edit an LLM's chain-of-thought as a tree, and a 16-person study reports improved perceived control, sense-making, and assumption awareness.
-
Lifted State Hypothesis in Large Language Models
LLMs find it easier to build general rules from specific examples than to shatter a too-general rule into subtypes when exceptions appear.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.