REVIEW 2 cited by
RATIONALYST: Mining Implicit Rationales for Process Supervision of Reasoning
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
Signed reviews
read the original abstract
The reasoning steps generated by LLMs might be incomplete, as they mimic logical leaps common in everyday communication found in their pre-training data: underlying rationales are frequently left implicit (unstated). To address this challenge, we introduce RATIONALYST, a model for process-supervision of reasoning based on pre-training on a vast collection of rationale annotations extracted from unlabeled data. We extract 79k rationales from web-scale unlabelled dataset (the Pile) and a combination of reasoning datasets with minimal human intervention. This web-scale pre-training for reasoning allows RATIONALYST to consistently generalize across diverse reasoning tasks, including mathematical, commonsense, scientific, and logical reasoning. Fine-tuned from LLaMa-3-8B, RATIONALYST improves the accuracy of reasoning by an average of 3.9% on 7 representative reasoning benchmarks. It also demonstrates superior performance compared to significantly larger verifiers like GPT-4 and similarly sized models fine-tuned on matching training sets.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Improving RL Exploration for LLM Reasoning through Retrospective Replay
RRL replays value-model-selected promising intermediate states during LLM RL training, preserving exploration and improving performance on code, math, and RLHF tasks.
-
Generative AI Act II: Test Time Scaling Drives Cognition Engineering
Test-time scaling techniques such as long chain-of-thought, tree search, and self-correction define the paper's 'cognition engineering' paradigm, which it surveys, taxonomizes, and tutorials.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.