Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
133 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
7 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
46 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Reasoning Abilities of Large Language Models: In-Depth Analysis on the Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus (2403.11793v3)

Published 18 Mar 2024 in cs.CL, cs.AI, cs.ET, and cs.SC

Abstract: The existing methods for evaluating the inference abilities of LLMs have been predominantly results-centric, making it challenging to assess the inference process comprehensively. We introduce a novel approach using the Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus (ARC) benchmark to evaluate the inference and contextual understanding abilities of LLMs in a process-centric manner, focusing on three key components from the Language of Thought Hypothesis (LoTH): Logical Coherence, Compositionality, and Productivity. Our carefully designed experiments reveal that while LLMs demonstrate some inference capabilities, they still significantly lag behind human-level reasoning in these three aspects. The main contribution of this paper lies in introducing the LoTH perspective, which provides a method for evaluating the reasoning process that conventional results-oriented approaches fail to capture, thereby offering new insights into the development of human-level reasoning in artificial intelligence systems.

Citations (9)

Summary

  • The paper introduces a process-centric evaluation using ARC to assess LLM reasoning based on logical coherence, compositionality, and productivity.
  • It employs advanced prompting methods such as Chain of Thought, Least to Most, and Tree of Thought, yet observes only modest accuracy improvements in logical coherence.
  • The study highlights the need for enhanced compositional and generative strategies to bridge the gap toward human-like reasoning in AI models.

Evaluation of Reasoning Capabilities in LLMs Using the Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus

The paper entitled "Reasoning Abilities of LLMs: In-Depth Analysis on the Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus" offers an insightful exploration of the inference abilities of LLMs through the lens of the Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus (ARC). This research introduces a process-centric approach to assess the logical reasoning capabilities of LLMs, diverging from the traditional results-oriented evaluation frameworks. The paper employs ARC, a benchmark focusing on challenging logical structures, to understand how LLMs mimic human-like reasoning.

Analysis of Inference Abilities

The paper embarks on a rigorous evaluation of LLMs' reasoning skills by exploring three primary constructs of the Language of Thought Hypothesis (LoTH): logical coherence, compositionality, and productivity. These constructs are carefully mapped to ARC tasks, facilitating a nuanced analysis of the models' performance.

Logical Coherence: The paper applies advanced prompting techniques such as Chain of Thought (CoT), Least to Most (LtM), and Tree of Thought (ToT). Despite these sophisticated methods, the results indicate only modest improvements in accuracy levels, highlighting significant deficiencies in the logical coherence of LLMs.

Compositionality: The authors engage LLMs with Domain-Specific Languages (DSLs) within the ARC framework to appraise their capability to combine simpler functions into complex operations. Notably, the LLMs show a marked understanding of individual functions but fall short in synthesizing these into coherent solutions for more complex tasks. This indicates the need for enhanced compositionality within present LLM architectures.

Productivity: By examining the models’ ability to generate unseen inputs from given outputs, the research underscores limitations in LLMs' productivity. The LLMs' inability to effectively derive new examples reflects a fundamental gap in stepping beyond deterministic learning processes to dynamic generalization, an aspect intrinsic to human reasoning.

Implications and Forward Pathways

This investigation probes critical aspects of LLM development, showcasing potential growth paths toward human-level reasoning. Despite the noted shortcomings, the analysis elucidates pathways for enhancing LLMs through diversified architectural strategies, fine-tuning procedures, and enriched prompt methodologies.

Practical Implications

The pursuit of augmenting LLM inferential capacities holds promising implications for practical applications, such as automated logic processing, AI-driven problem-solving, and enhanced machine reasoning in dynamic environments.

Theoretical Implications

The paper advocates for an evolved understanding of reasoning models, proposing the integration of LoTH elements to mimic human-like inferential processes more accurately. It further hints at leveraging object-based representations and advancements in compositional syntax to achieve nuanced reasoning capabilities.

Future Scope

Progressing beyond ARC, the authors suggest exploring AI models situated in more complex and varied environments, facilitating a comprehensive ascent toward human-like adaptability and cognitive flexibility. The emphasis on advancing abstraction levels through large datasets and enriched semantic information further defines a promising trajectory for future LLM research.

In conclusion, while the analysis confirms LLMs possess foundational reasoning abilities, it also underscores significant distances from achieving human-equivalent inferential proficiency. The paper’s meticulous exploration paves the way for a systematic enhancement of LLM architectures, promising substantial advancements in AI reasoning paradigms.