Accurate mathematical reasoning with Large Language Models (LLMs) is crucial in revolutionizing domains that heavily rely on such reasoning. However, LLMs often encounter difficulties in certain aspects of mathematical reasoning, leading to flawed reasoning and erroneous results. To mitigate these issues, we introduce a novel mechanism, the Chain of Self-Correction (CoSC), specifically designed to embed self-correction as an inherent ability in LLMs, enabling them to validate and rectify their own results. The CoSC mechanism operates through a sequence of self-correction stages. In each stage, the LLMs generate a program to address a given problem, execute this program using program-based tools to obtain an output, subsequently verify this output. Based on the verification, the LLMs either proceed to the next correction stage or finalize the answer. This iterative self-correction process allows the LLMs to refine their reasoning steps and improve the accuracy of their mathematical reasoning. To enable the CoSC mechanism at a low cost, we employ a two-phase finetuning approach. In the first phase, the LLMs are trained with a relatively small volume of seeding data generated from GPT-4, establishing an initial CoSC capability. In the second phase, the CoSC capability is further enhanced by training with a larger volume of self-generated data using the trained model in the first phase, without relying on the paid GPT-4. Our comprehensive experiments demonstrate that CoSC significantly improves performance on traditional mathematical datasets among existing open-source LLMs. Notably, our CoSC-Code-34B model achieved a 53.5% score on MATH, the most challenging mathematical reasoning dataset in the public domain, surpassing the performance of well-established models such as ChatGPT, GPT-4, and even multi-modal LLMs like GPT-4V, Gemini-1.0 Pro, and Gemini-1.0 Ultra.
Humor is a culturally nuanced aspect of human language that presents challenges for understanding and generation, requiring participants to possess good creativity and strong associative thinking. Similar to reasoning tasks like solving math problems, humor generation requires continuous reflection and revision to foster creative thinking, rather than relying on a sudden flash of inspiration like Creative Leap-of-Thought (CLoT) paradigm. Although CLoT can realize the ability of remote association generation, this paradigm fails to generate humor content. Therefore, in this paper, we propose a systematic way of thinking about generating humor and based on it, we built Creative Leap of Structured Thought (CLoST) frame. First, a reward model is necessary achieve the purpose of being able to correct errors, since there is currently no expert model of humor and a usable rule to determine whether a piece of content is humorous. Judgement-oriented instructions are designed to improve the capability of a model, and we also propose an open-domain instruction evolutionary method to fully unleash the potential. Then, through reinforcement learning, the model learns to hone its rationales of the thought chain and refine the strategies it uses. Thus, it learns to recognize and correct its mistakes, and finally generate the most humorous and creative answer. These findings deepen our understanding of the creative capabilities of LLMs and provide ways to enhance LLMs' creative abilities for cross-domain innovative applications.
Mathematical reasoning remains a significant challenge for large language models (LLMs), despite progress in prompting techniques such as Chain-of-Thought (CoT). We present Chain of Mathematically Annotated Thought (CoMAT), which enhances reasoning through two stages: Symbolic Conversion (converting natural language queries into symbolic form) and Reasoning Execution (deriving answers from symbolic representations). CoMAT operates entirely with a single LLM and without external solvers. Across four LLMs, CoMAT outperforms traditional CoT on six out of seven benchmarks, achieving gains of 4.48% on MMLU-Redux (MATH) and 4.58% on GaoKao MCQ. In addition to improved performance, CoMAT ensures faithfulness and verifiability, offering a transparent reasoning process for complex mathematical tasks
Large language models (LLMs) like GPT-4, PaLM, and LLaMA have shown significant improvements in various reasoning tasks. However, smaller models such as Llama-3-8B and DeepSeekMath-Base still struggle with complex mathematical reasoning because they fail to effectively identify and correct reasoning errors. Recent reflection-based methods aim to address these issues by enabling self-reflection and self-correction, but they still face challenges in independently detecting errors in their reasoning steps. To overcome these limitations, we propose SuperCorrect, a novel two-stage framework that uses a large teacher model to supervise and correct both the reasoning and reflection processes of a smaller student model. In the first stage, we extract hierarchical high-level and detailed thought templates from the teacher model to guide the student model in eliciting more fine-grained reasoning thoughts. In the second stage, we introduce cross-model collaborative direct preference optimization (DPO) to enhance the self-correction abilities of the student model by following the teacher's correction traces during training. This cross-model DPO approach teaches the student model to effectively locate and resolve erroneous thoughts with error-driven insights from the teacher model, breaking the bottleneck of its thoughts and acquiring new skills and knowledge to tackle challenging problems. Extensive experiments consistently demonstrate our superiority over previous methods. Notably, our SuperCorrect-7B model significantly surpasses powerful DeepSeekMath-7B by 7.8%/5.3% and Qwen2.5-Math-7B by 15.1%/6.3% on MATH/GSM8K benchmarks, achieving new SOTA performance among all 7B models. Code: https://github.com/YangLing0818/SuperCorrect-llm
I study altruistic choices through the lens of a cognitively noisy decision-maker. I introduce a theoretical framework that demonstrates how increased cognitive noise can directionally affect altruistic decisions and put its implications to the test: In a laboratory experiment, participants make a series of binary choices between taking and giving monetary payments. In the treatment, to-be-calculated math sums replace straightforward monetary payments, increasing the cognitive difficulty of choosing. The Treatment group exhibits a lower sensitivity towards changes in payments and decides significantly more often in favor of the other person, i.e., is more altruistic. I explore the origins of this effect with Bayesian hierarchical models and a number-comparison task, mirroring the "mechanics" of the altruism choices absent any altruistic preference. The treatment effect is similar in this task, suggesting that the perception of numerical magnitudes drives treatment differences. The probabilistic model supports this interpretation. A series of additional results show a negative correlation between cognitive reflection and individual measures of cognitive noise, as well as associations between altruistic choice and number comparison. Overall, these results suggest that the expression of altruistic preferences -- and potentially social preferences more generally -- is affected by the cognitive difficulty of their implementation.
Recent advancements in large language models (LLMs) have led to significant breakthroughs in mathematical reasoning capabilities. However, existing benchmarks like GSM8K or MATH are now being solved with high accuracy (e.g., OpenAI o1 achieves 94.8\% on MATH dataset), indicating their inadequacy for truly challenging these models. To bridge this gap, we propose a comprehensive and challenging benchmark specifically designed to assess LLMs' mathematical reasoning at the Olympiad level. Unlike existing Olympiad-related benchmarks, our dataset focuses exclusively on mathematics and comprises a vast collection of 4428 competition-level problems with rigorous human annotation. These problems are meticulously categorized into over 33 sub-domains and span more than 10 distinct difficulty levels, enabling a holistic assessment of model performance in Olympiad-mathematical reasoning. Furthermore, we conducted an in-depth analysis based on this benchmark. Our experimental results show that even the most advanced models, OpenAI o1-mini and OpenAI o1-preview, struggle with highly challenging Olympiad-level problems, with 60.54\% and 52.55\% accuracy, highlighting significant challenges in Olympiad-level mathematical reasoning.
Code has been shown to be effective in enhancing the mathematical reasoning abilities of large language models due to its precision and accuracy. Previous works involving continued mathematical pretraining often include code that utilizes math-related packages, which are primarily designed for fields such as engineering, machine learning, signal processing, or module testing, rather than being directly focused on mathematical reasoning. In this paper, we introduce a novel method for generating mathematical code accompanied with corresponding reasoning steps for continued pretraining. Our approach begins with the construction of a high-quality mathematical continued pretraining dataset by incorporating math-related web data, code using mathematical packages, math textbooks, and synthetic data. Next, we construct reasoning steps by extracting LaTeX expressions, the conditions needed for the expressions, and the results of the expressions from the previously collected dataset. Based on this extracted information, we generate corresponding code to accurately capture the mathematical reasoning process. Appending the generated code to each reasoning step results in data consisting of paired natural language reasoning steps and their corresponding code. Combining this data with the original dataset results in a 19.2B-token high-performing mathematical pretraining corpus, which we name MathCode-Pile. Training several popular base models with this corpus significantly improves their mathematical abilities, leading to the creation of the MathCoder2 family of models. All of our data processing and training code is open-sourced, ensuring full transparency and easy reproducibility of the entire data collection and training pipeline. The code is released at https://github.com/mathllm/MathCoder2 .
Large Language Models (LLMs) exhibit impressive performance across various domains but still struggle with arithmetic reasoning tasks. Recent work shows the effectiveness of prompt design methods in enhancing reasoning capabilities. However, these approaches overlook crucial requirements for prior knowledge of specific concepts, theorems, and tricks to tackle most arithmetic reasoning problems successfully. To address this issue, we propose a novel and effective Teaching-Inspired Integrated Framework, which emulates the instructional process of a teacher guiding students. This method equips LLMs with essential concepts, relevant theorems, and similar problems with analogous solution approaches, facilitating the enhancement of reasoning abilities. Additionally, we introduce two new Chinese datasets, MathMC and MathToF, both with detailed explanations and answers. Experiments are conducted on nine benchmarks which demonstrates that our approach improves the reasoning accuracy of LLMs. With GPT-4 and our framework, we achieve new state-of-the-art performance on four math benchmarks (AddSub, SVAMP, Math23K and AQuA) with accuracies of 98.2% (+3.3%), 93.9% (+0.2%), 94.3% (+7.2%) and 81.1% (+1.2%). Our data and code are available at https://github.com/SallyTan13/Teaching-Inspired-Prompting.
Humans have the ability to learn new tasks by inferring high-level concepts from existing solution, then manipulating these concepts in lieu of the raw data. Can we automate this process by deriving latent semantic structures in a document collection using foundation models? We introduce fPLSA, a foundation-model-based Probabilistic Latent Semantic Analysis (PLSA) method that iteratively clusters and tags document segments based on document-level contexts. These tags can be used to model the structure of given documents and for hierarchical sampling of new texts. Our experiments on story writing, math, and multi-step reasoning datasets demonstrate that fPLSA tags help reconstruct the original texts better than existing tagging methods. Moreover, when used for hierarchical sampling, fPLSA produces more diverse outputs with a higher likelihood of hitting the correct answer than direct sampling and hierarchical sampling with existing tagging methods.
Despite significant advancements in the general capability of large language models (LLMs), they continue to struggle with consistent and accurate reasoning, especially in complex tasks such as mathematical and code reasoning. One key limitation is that LLMs are trained primarily on correct solutions, reducing their ability to detect and learn from errors, which hampers their ability to reliably verify and rank outputs. To address this, we scale up the inference-time computation by generating multiple reasoning paths and employing verifiers to assess and rank the generated outputs by correctness. To facilitate this, we introduce a comprehensive dataset consisting of correct and incorrect solutions for math and code tasks, generated by multiple LLMs. This diverse set of solutions enables verifiers to more effectively distinguish and rank correct answers from erroneous outputs. The training methods for building verifiers were selected based on an extensive comparison of existing approaches. Moreover, to leverage the unique strengths of different reasoning strategies, we propose a novel collaborative method integrating Chain-of-Thought (CoT) and Program-of-Thought (PoT) solutions for verification. CoT provides a clear, step-by-step reasoning process that enhances interpretability, while PoT, being executable, offers a precise and error-sensitive validation mechanism. By taking both of their strengths, our approach significantly improves the accuracy and reliability of reasoning verification. Our verifiers, Math-Rev and Code-Rev, demonstrate substantial performance gains to existing LLMs, achieving state-of-the-art results on benchmarks such as GSM8k and MATH and even outperforming GPT-4o with Qwen-72B-Instruct as the reasoner.
Hallucinations in large language models (LLMs) pose significant challenges in tasks requiring complex multi-step reasoning, such as mathematical problem-solving. Existing approaches primarily detect the presence of hallucinations but lack a nuanced understanding of their types and manifestations. In this paper, we first introduce a comprehensive taxonomy that categorizes the common hallucinations in mathematical reasoning task into six types: fabrication, factual inconsistency, context inconsistency, instruction inconsistency, logical inconsistency, and logical error. We then propose FG-PRM (Fine-Grained Process Reward Model), an augmented model designed to detect and mitigate hallucinations in a fine-grained, step-level manner. To address the limitations of manually labeling training data, we propose an automated method for generating fine-grained hallucination data using LLMs. By injecting hallucinations into reasoning steps of correct solutions, we create a diverse and balanced synthetic dataset for training FG-PRM, which consists of six specialized Process Reward Models (PRMs), each tailored to detect a specific hallucination type. Our FG-PRM demonstrates superior performance across two key tasks: 1) Fine-grained hallucination detection: classifying hallucination types for each reasoning step; and 2) Verification: ranking multiple LLM-generated outputs to select the most accurate solution, mitigating reasoning hallucinations. Our experiments show that FG-PRM outperforms ChatGPT-3.5 and Claude-3 on fine-grained hallucination detection and substantially boosts the performance of LLMs on GSM8K and MATH benchmarks.
Can neural networks solve math problems using first a principle alone? This paper shows how to leverage the fundamental theorem of the calculus of variations to design deep neural networks to solve functional optimization without requiring training data (e.g., ground-truth optimal solutions). Our approach is particularly crucial when the solution is a function defined over an unknown interval or support\textemdash such as in minimum-time control problems. By incorporating the necessary conditions satisfied by the optimal function solution, as derived from the calculus of variation, in the design of the deep architecture, CalVNet leverages overparameterized neural networks to learn these optimal functions directly. We validate CalVNet by showing that, without relying on ground-truth data and simply incorporating first principles, it successfully derives the Kalman filter for linear filtering, the bang-bang optimal control for minimum-time problems, and finds geodesics on manifolds. Our results demonstrate that CalVNet can be trained in an unsupervised manner, without relying on ground-truth data, establishing a promising framework for addressing general, potentially unsolved functional optimization problems that still lack analytical solutions.
The process of creating training data to teach models is currently driven by humans, who manually analyze model weaknesses and plan how to create data that improves a student model. Approaches using LLMs as annotators reduce human effort, but still require humans to interpret feedback from evaluations and control the LLM to produce data the student needs. Automating this labor-intensive process by creating autonomous data generation agents - or teachers - is desirable, but requires environments that can simulate the feedback-driven, iterative, closed loop of data creation. To enable rapid, scalable testing for such agents and their modules, we introduce DataEnvGym, a testbed of teacher environments for data generation agents. DataEnvGym frames data generation as a sequential decision-making task, involving an agent consisting of a data generation policy (which generates a plan for creating training data) and a data generation engine (which transforms the plan into data), inside an environment that provides student feedback. The agent's goal is to improve student performance. Students are iteratively trained and evaluated on generated data, and their feedback (in the form of errors or weak skills) is reported to the agent after each iteration. DataEnvGym includes multiple teacher environment instantiations across 3 levels of structure in the state representation and action space. More structured environments are based on inferred skills and offer more interpretability and curriculum control. We support 4 domains (math, code, VQA, and tool-use) and test multiple students and teachers. Example agents in our teaching environments can iteratively improve students across tasks and settings. Moreover, we show that environments teach different skill levels and test variants of key modules, pointing to future work in improving data generation agents, engines, and feedback mechanisms.
Vision-Language Models (VLMs) have transformed tasks requiring visual and reasoning abilities, such as image retrieval and Visual Question Answering (VQA). Despite their success, VLMs face significant challenges with tasks involving geometric reasoning, algebraic problem-solving, and counting. These limitations stem from difficulties effectively integrating multiple modalities and accurately interpreting geometry-related tasks. Various works claim that introducing a captioning pipeline before VQA tasks enhances performance. We incorporated this pipeline for tasks involving geometry, algebra, and counting. We found that captioning results are not generalizable, specifically with larger VLMs primarily trained on downstream QnA tasks showing random performance on math-related challenges. However, we present a promising alternative: task-based prompting, enriching the prompt with task-specific guidance. This approach shows promise and proves more effective than direct captioning methods for math-heavy problems.
While state-of-the-art LLMs have shown poor logical and basic mathematical reasoning, recent works try to improve their problem-solving abilities using prompting techniques. We propose giving "hints" to improve the language model's performance on advanced mathematical problems, taking inspiration from how humans approach math pedagogically. We also test robustness to adversarial hints and demonstrate their sensitivity to them. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach by evaluating various diverse LLMs, presenting them with a broad set of problems of different difficulties and topics from the MATH dataset and comparing against techniques such as one-shot, few-shot, and chain of thought prompting.
The research builds and evaluates the adversarial potential to introduce copied code or hallucinated AI recommendations for malicious code in popular code repositories. While foundational large language models (LLMs) from OpenAI, Google, and Anthropic guard against both harmful behaviors and toxic strings, previous work on math solutions that embed harmful prompts demonstrate that the guardrails may differ between expert contexts. These loopholes would appear in mixture of expert's models when the context of the question changes and may offer fewer malicious training examples to filter toxic comments or recommended offensive actions. The present work demonstrates that foundational models may refuse to propose destructive actions correctly when prompted overtly but may unfortunately drop their guard when presented with a sudden change of context, like solving a computer programming challenge. We show empirical examples with trojan-hosting repositories like GitHub, NPM, NuGet, and popular content delivery networks (CDN) like jsDelivr which amplify the attack surface. In the LLM's directives to be helpful, example recommendations propose application programming interface (API) endpoints which a determined domain-squatter could acquire and setup attack mobile infrastructure that triggers from the naively copied code. We compare this attack to previous work on context-shifting and contrast the attack surface as a novel version of "living off the land" attacks in the malware literature. In the latter case, foundational language models can hijack otherwise innocent user prompts to recommend actions that violate their owners' safety policies when posed directly without the accompanying coding support request.
Large Language Models (LLMs) have exhibited strong mathematical reasoning and computational prowess, tackling tasks ranging from basic arithmetic to advanced competition-level problems. However, frequently occurring subtle errors, such as miscalculations or incorrect substitutions, limit the models' full mathematical potential. Existing studies to improve mathematical ability typically involve distilling reasoning skills from stronger LLMs or applying preference learning to step-wise response pairs. Although these methods leverage samples of varying granularity to mitigate reasoning errors, they overlook the frequently occurring subtle errors. A major reason is that sampled preference pairs involve differences unrelated to the errors, which may distract the model from focusing on subtle errors. In this work, we propose a novel preference learning framework called eRror-Injected Self-Editing (RISE), which injects predefined subtle errors into partial tokens of correct solutions to construct hard pairs for error mitigation. In detail, RISE uses the model itself to edit a small number of tokens in the solution, injecting designed subtle errors. Then, pairs composed of self-edited solutions and their corresponding correct ones, along with pairs of correct and incorrect solutions obtained through sampling, are used together for subtle error-aware DPO training. Compared with other preference learning methods, RISE further refines the training objective to focus on predefined errors and their tokens, without requiring fine-grained sampling or preference annotation. Extensive experiments validate the effectiveness of RISE, with preference learning on Qwen2-7B-Instruct yielding notable improvements of 3.0% on GSM8K and 7.9% on MATH.
The Superficial Alignment Hypothesis posits that almost all of a language model's abilities and knowledge are learned during pre-training, while post-training is about giving a model the right style and format. We re-examine these claims by empirically studying the scaling behavior of post-training with increasing finetuning examples and evaluating them using objective task-specific standardized benchmarks. Through experiments with the Llama-3, Mistral, and Llama-2 model families of multiple sizes, we observe that, similar to the pre-training scaling laws, post-training task performance scales as a power law against the number of finetuning examples. This power law relationship holds across a broad array of capabilities, including mathematical reasoning, coding, instruction following, and multihop-reasoning. In addition, for tasks like math and multihop reasoning, we observe that a handful of examples merely align the model stylistically but do not saturate performance on the benchmarks. Model performance is instead correlated with its reasoning ability and it improves significantly with more examples, illustrating the need for holistic evaluation programs leveraging objective benchmarks in addition to measurement of alignment to human preferences. We also observe that language models are not necessarily limited to using knowledge learned during pre-training. With appropriate post-training, a model's ability to integrate new knowledge greatly improves on downstream tasks like multihop question-answering. Taken together, these results shed new light on the Superficial Alignment Hypothesis, suggesting that it is, at best, an over-simplification.
Despite the continuous progress of Large Language Models (LLMs) across various tasks, their performance on mathematical problems and reasoning tasks remains limited. This limitation can be attributed, among other factors, to the inherent difficulty of these problems and the fact that solutions often consist of multiple steps, potentially of varying nature, making it challenging for a single prompting technique to execute all required steps. To address this, we introduce BloomWise, a new prompting technique, inspired by Bloom's Taxonomy, aiming to improve LLMs' performance in solving such problems by encouraging them to approach the problem starting from simple, i.e., remembering, and progressing to higher cognitive skills, i.e., analyzing, until the correct solution is reached. The decision regarding the need to employ more sophisticated cognitive skills is based on self-evaluation performed by the LLM. Thus, we encourage the LLM to deploy the appropriate cognitive processes. In extensive experiments across 4 popular math reasoning datasets, we have demonstrated the effectiveness of our proposed approach. We also present extensive ablations, analyzing the strengths of each module within our system.
One-to-one tutoring is one of the most efficient methods of teaching. With the growing popularity of Large Language Models (LLMs), there have been efforts to create LLM based conversational tutors which can expand the benefits of one to one tutoring to everyone. However, current LLMs are trained primarily to be helpful assistants and lack crucial pedagogical skills. For example, they often quickly reveal the solution to the student and fail to plan for a richer multi turn pedagogical interaction. To use LLMs in pedagogical settings, they need to be steered to use effective teaching strategies: a problem we introduce as Pedagogical Steering. We develop StratL, an algorithm to optimize LLM prompts and steer it to follow a predefined multi-turn tutoring plan represented as a transition graph. As a case study, we create a prototype tutor for high school math following Productive Failure (PF), an advanced and effective learning design. To validate our approach in a real-world setting, we run a field study with 17 high school students in Singapore and show that StratL succeeds in steering the LLM to follow the PF tutoring strategy. Finally, we highlight challenges in Pedagogical Steering of LLMs and offer opportunities for further improvements by publishing a dataset of PF problems and our code.