When is the consistent prediction likely to be a correct prediction?
Reviewed by Pith T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 kernel pith:WPQA7PD3record.jsonopen to challenge →
read the original abstract
Self-consistency (Wang et al., 2023) suggests that the most consistent answer obtained through large language models (LLMs) is more likely to be correct. In this paper, we challenge this argument and propose a nuanced correction. Our observations indicate that consistent answers derived through more computation i.e. longer reasoning texts, rather than simply the most consistent answer across all outputs, are more likely to be correct. This is predominantly because we demonstrate that LLMs can autonomously produce chain-of-thought (CoT) style reasoning with no custom prompts merely while generating longer responses, which lead to consistent predictions that are more accurate. In the zero-shot setting, by sampling Mixtral-8x7B model multiple times and considering longer responses, we achieve 86% of its self-consistency performance obtained through zero-shot CoT prompting on the GSM8K and MultiArith datasets. Finally, we demonstrate that the probability of LLMs generating a longer response is quite low, highlighting the need for decoding strategies conditioned on output length.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Beyond the Frontier: Stochastic Backtracking for Efficient Test-Time Scaling
Stochastic backtracking with subpool selection and power backtrack SMC over persistent prefix pools improves accuracy per token in PRM-guided test-time scaling for mathematical reasoning.
-
Large Language Monkeys: Scaling Inference Compute with Repeated Sampling
Repeated sampling scales problem coverage log-linearly with sample count, improving SWE-bench Lite performance from 15.9% to 56% using 250 samples.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.