We propose MM-Vet, an evaluation benchmark that examines large multimodal models (LMMs) on complicated multimodal tasks. Recent LMMs have shown various intriguing abilities, such as solving math problems written on the blackboard, reasoning about events and celebrities in news images, and explaining visual jokes. Rapid model advancements pose challenges to evaluation benchmark development. Problems include: (1) How to systematically structure and evaluate the complicated multimodal tasks; (2) How to design evaluation metrics that work well across question and answer types; and (3) How to give model insights beyond a simple performance ranking. To this end, we present MM-Vet, designed based on the insight that the intriguing ability to solve complicated tasks is often achieved by a generalist model being able to integrate different core vision-language (VL) capabilities. MM-Vet defines 6 core VL capabilities and examines the 16 integrations of interest derived from the capability combination. For evaluation metrics, we propose an LLM-based evaluator for open-ended outputs. The evaluator enables the evaluation across different question types and answer styles, resulting in a unified scoring metric. We evaluate representative LMMs on MM-Vet, providing insights into the capabilities of different LMM system paradigms and models.
Large language models (LLMs) have revolutionized NLP by solving downstream tasks with little to no labeled data. Despite their versatile abilities, the larger question of their ability to reason remains ill-understood. This paper addresses reasoning in math word problems (MWPs) by studying symbolic versions of the numeric problems, since a symbolic expression is a "concise explanation" of the numeric answer. We create and use a symbolic version of the SVAMP dataset and find that GPT-3's davinci-002 model also has good zero-shot accuracy on symbolic MWPs. To evaluate the faithfulness of the model's reasoning, we go beyond accuracy and additionally evaluate the alignment between the final answer and the outputted reasoning, which correspond to numeric and symbolic answers respectively for MWPs. We explore a self-prompting approach to encourage the symbolic reasoning to align with the numeric answer, thus equipping the LLM with the ability to provide a concise and verifiable reasoning and making it more interpretable. Surprisingly, self-prompting also improves the symbolic accuracy to be higher than both the numeric and symbolic accuracies, thus providing an ensembling effect. The SVAMP_Sym dataset will be released for future research on symbolic math problems.
We investigate how to elicit compositional generalization capabilities in large language models (LLMs). Compositional generalization empowers LLMs to solve complex problems by combining foundational skills, a critical reasoning ability akin to human intelligence. However, even the most advanced LLMs currently struggle with this form of reasoning. We examine this problem within the framework of in-context learning and find that demonstrating both foundational skills and compositional examples grounded in these skills within the same prompt context is crucial. We refer to this prompt structure as skills-in-context (SKiC). With as few as two exemplars, this in-context learning structure enables LLMs to tackle more challenging problems requiring innovative skill combinations, achieving near-perfect systematic generalization across a broad range of tasks. Intriguingly, SKiC also unlocks the latent potential of LLMs, allowing them to more actively utilize pre-existing internal skills acquired during earlier pretraining stages to solve complex reasoning problems. The SKiC structure is robust across different skill constructions and exemplar choices and demonstrates strong transferability to new tasks. Finally, inspired by our in-context learning study, we show that fine-tuning LLMs with SKiC-style data can elicit zero-shot weak-to-strong generalization, enabling the models to solve much harder problems directly with standard prompting.
The recent progress in large language models (LLMs), especially the invention of chain-of-thought prompting, has made it possible to automatically answer questions by stepwise reasoning. However, when faced with more complicated problems that require non-linear thinking, even the strongest LLMs make mistakes. To address this, we explore whether LLMs are able to recognize errors in their own step-by-step reasoning, without resorting to external resources. To this end, we propose SelfCheck, a general-purpose zero-shot verification schema for recognizing such errors. We then use the results of these checks to improve question-answering performance by conducting weighted voting on multiple solutions to the question. We test SelfCheck on three datasets (GSM8K, MathQA, and MATH) and find that it successfully recognizes errors and, in turn, increases final answer accuracies.
We introduce Augmented Math, a machine learning-based approach to authoring AR explorable explanations by augmenting static math textbooks without programming. To augment a static document, our system first extracts mathematical formulas and figures from a given document using optical character recognition (OCR) and computer vision. By binding and manipulating these extracted contents, the user can see the interactive animation overlaid onto the document through mobile AR interfaces. This empowers non-technical users, such as teachers or students, to transform existing math textbooks and handouts into on-demand and personalized explorable explanations. To design our system, we first analyzed existing explorable math explanations to identify common design strategies. Based on the findings, we developed a set of augmentation techniques that can be automatically generated based on the extracted content, which are 1) dynamic values, 2) interactive figures, 3) relationship highlights, 4) concrete examples, and 5) step-by-step hints. To evaluate our system, we conduct two user studies: preliminary user testing and expert interviews. The study results confirm that our system allows more engaging experiences for learning math concepts.
Automated math word problem solvers based on neural networks have successfully managed to obtain 70-80\% accuracy in solving arithmetic word problems. However, it has been shown that these solvers may rely on superficial patterns to obtain their equations. In order to determine what information math word problem solvers use to generate solutions, we remove parts of the input and measure the model's performance on the perturbed dataset. Our results show that the model is not sensitive to the removal of many words from the input and can still manage to find a correct answer when given a nonsense question. This indicates that automatic solvers do not follow the semantic logic of math word problems, and may be overfitting to the presence of specific words.
Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable performance on various quantitative reasoning and knowledge benchmarks. However, many of these benchmarks are losing utility as LLMs get increasingly high scores, despite not yet reaching expert performance in these domains. We introduce ARB, a novel benchmark composed of advanced reasoning problems in multiple fields. ARB presents a more challenging test than prior benchmarks, featuring problems in mathematics, physics, biology, chemistry, and law. As a subset of ARB, we introduce a challenging set of math and physics problems which require advanced symbolic reasoning and domain knowledge. We evaluate recent models such as GPT-4 and Claude on ARB and demonstrate that current models score well below 50% on more demanding tasks. In order to improve both automatic and assisted evaluation capabilities, we introduce a rubric-based evaluation approach, allowing GPT-4 to score its own intermediate reasoning steps. Further, we conduct a human evaluation of the symbolic subset of ARB, finding promising agreement between annotators and GPT-4 rubric evaluation scores.
This paper investigates how hallucination rates in Large Language Models (LLMs) may be controlled via a symbolic data generation framework, exploring a fundamental relationship between the rate of certain mathematical errors and types of input intervention. Specifically, we systematically generate data for a derivation generation task using a symbolic engine, applying targeted interventions to prompts to perturb features of mathematical derivations such as the surface forms of symbols, equational tree structures, and mathematical context. We then evaluate the effect of prompt interventions across a range of LLMs including fine-tuned T5 models, GPT, and LLaMa-based models. Our experiments suggest that T5-Large can outperform the few-shot performance of GPT-4 on various evaluation sets generated via the framework. However, an extensive evaluation based on human analysis, template-based error detection, and text generation metrics reveals model weaknesses beyond what the reference-based metrics singularly describe. We use these results to tie characteristic distributional footprints of interventions to the human evaluation of LLM derivation quality, potentially leading to significant control over fine-grained mathematical capabilities of language models with respect to specific types of errors.
GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 are the two most widely used large language model (LLM) services. However, when and how these models are updated over time is opaque. Here, we evaluate the March 2023 and June 2023 versions of GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 on several diverse tasks: 1) math problems, 2) sensitive/dangerous questions, 3) opinion surveys, 4) multi-hop knowledge-intensive questions, 5) generating code, 6) US Medical License tests, and 7) visual reasoning. We find that the performance and behavior of both GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 can vary greatly over time. For example, GPT-4 (March 2023) was reasonable at identifying prime vs. composite numbers (84% accuracy) but GPT-4 (June 2023) was poor on these same questions (51% accuracy). This is partly explained by a drop in GPT-4's amenity to follow chain-of-thought prompting. Interestingly, GPT-3.5 was much better in June than in March in this task. GPT-4 became less willing to answer sensitive questions and opinion survey questions in June than in March. GPT-4 performed better at multi-hop questions in June than in March, while GPT-3.5's performance dropped on this task. Both GPT-4 and GPT-3.5 had more formatting mistakes in code generation in June than in March. We provide evidence that GPT-4's ability to follow user instructions has decreased over time, which is one common factor behind the many behavior drifts. Overall, our findings show that the behavior of the "same" LLM service can change substantially in a relatively short amount of time, highlighting the need for continuous monitoring of LLMs.
When to solve math problems, most language models take a sampling strategy to predict next word according conditional probabilities. In the math reasoning step, it may generate wrong answer. Considering math problems are deterministic, we propose a mixed policy exploration approach to solve math problems with reinforcement learning. In peculiar, we propose a two level token exploration policy: the abstract level explores next token with probability and the second level is deterministic. Specifically, the abstract level policy will decide whether the token is operator or operand with probability sampling, while the second level is deterministic to select next token with the highest score in a greedy way. We test our method on GSM8K dataset with GPT-2 model, and demonstrate more than $2\%$ performance gain. Our implementation is available at https://github.com/vividitytech/math_lm_rl.
The advancement in generative AI could be boosted with more accessible mathematics. Beyond human-AI chat, large language models (LLMs) are emerging in programming, algorithm discovery, and theorem proving, yet their genomics application is limited. This project introduces Math Agents and mathematical embedding as fresh entries to the "Moore's Law of Mathematics", using a GPT-based workflow to convert equations from literature into LaTeX and Python formats. While many digital equation representations exist, there's a lack of automated large-scale evaluation tools. LLMs are pivotal as linguistic user interfaces, providing natural language access for human-AI chat and formal languages for large-scale AI-assisted computational infrastructure. Given the infinite formal possibility spaces, Math Agents, which interact with math, could potentially shift us from "big data" to "big math". Math, unlike the more flexible natural language, has properties subject to proof, enabling its use beyond traditional applications like high-validation math-certified icons for AI alignment aims. This project aims to use Math Agents and mathematical embeddings to address the ageing issue in information systems biology by applying multiscalar physics mathematics to disease models and genomic data. Generative AI with episodic memory could help analyse causal relations in longitudinal health records, using SIR Precision Health models. Genomic data is suggested for addressing the unsolved Alzheimer's disease problem.
Math Word Problems (MWPs) in online assessments help test the ability of the learner to make critical inferences by interpreting the linguistic information in them. To test the mathematical reasoning capabilities of the learners, sometimes the problem is rephrased or the thematic setting of the original MWP is changed. Since manual identification of MWPs with similar problem models is cumbersome, we propose a tool in this work for MWP retrieval. We propose a hybrid approach to retrieve similar MWPs with the same problem model. In our work, the problem model refers to the sequence of operations to be performed to arrive at the solution. We demonstrate that our tool is useful for the mentioned tasks and better than semantic similarity-based approaches, which fail to capture the arithmetic and logical sequence of the MWPs. A demo of the tool can be found at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gSQWP3chFIs
We present the Chinese Elementary School Math Word Problems (CMATH) dataset, comprising 1.7k elementary school-level math word problems with detailed annotations, source from actual Chinese workbooks and exams. This dataset aims to provide a benchmark tool for assessing the following question: to what grade level of elementary school math do the abilities of popular large language models (LLMs) correspond? We evaluate a variety of popular LLMs, including both commercial and open-source options, and discover that only GPT-4 achieves success (accuracy $\geq$ 60\%) across all six elementary school grades, while other models falter at different grade levels. Furthermore, we assess the robustness of several top-performing LLMs by augmenting the original problems in the CMATH dataset with distracting information. Our findings reveal that GPT-4 is able to maintains robustness, while other model fail. We anticipate that our study will expose limitations in LLMs' arithmetic and reasoning capabilities, and promote their ongoing development and advancement.
The art of mathematical reasoning stands as a fundamental pillar of intellectual progress and is a central catalyst in cultivating human ingenuity. Researchers have recently published a plethora of works centered around the task of solving Math Word Problems (MWP) $-$ a crucial stride towards general AI. These existing models are susceptible to dependency on shallow heuristics and spurious correlations to derive the solution expressions. In order to ameliorate this issue, in this paper, we propose a framework for MWP solvers based on the generation of linguistic variants of the problem text. The approach involves solving each of the variant problems and electing the predicted expression with the majority of the votes. We use DeBERTa (Decoding-enhanced BERT with disentangled attention) as the encoder to leverage its rich textual representations and enhanced mask decoder to construct the solution expressions. Furthermore, we introduce a challenging dataset, $\mathrm{P\small{ARA}\normalsize{MAWPS}}$, consisting of paraphrased, adversarial, and inverse variants of selectively sampled MWPs from the benchmark $\mathrm{M\small{AWPS}}$ dataset. We extensively experiment on this dataset along with other benchmark datasets using some baseline MWP solver models. We show that training on linguistic variants of problem statements and voting on candidate predictions improve the mathematical reasoning and robustness of the model. We make our code and data publicly available.
Language models still struggle on moral reasoning, despite their impressive performance in many other tasks. In particular, the Moral Scenarios task in MMLU (Multi-task Language Understanding) is among the worst performing tasks for many language models, including GPT-3. In this work, we propose a new prompting framework, Thought Experiments, to teach language models to do better moral reasoning using counterfactuals. Experiment results show that our framework elicits counterfactual questions and answers from the model, which in turn helps improve the accuracy on Moral Scenarios task by 9-16% compared to other zero-shot baselines. Interestingly, unlike math reasoning tasks, zero-shot Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning doesn't work out of the box, and even reduces accuracy by around 4% compared to direct zero-shot. We further observed that with minimal human supervision in the form of 5 few-shot examples, the accuracy of the task can be improved to as much as 80%.
Recently, Multimodal Large Language Model (MLLM) represented by GPT-4V has been a new rising research hotspot, which uses powerful Large Language Models (LLMs) as a brain to perform multimodal tasks. The surprising emergent capabilities of MLLM, such as writing stories based on images and OCR-free math reasoning, are rare in traditional multimodal methods, suggesting a potential path to artificial general intelligence. To this end, both academia and industry have endeavored to develop MLLMs that can compete with or even better than GPT-4V, pushing the limit of research at a surprising speed. In this paper, we aim to trace and summarize the recent progress of MLLMs. First of all, we present the basic formulation of MLLM and delineate its related concepts, including architecture, training strategy and data, as well as evaluation. Then, we introduce research topics about how MLLMs can be extended to support more granularity, modalities, languages, and scenarios. We continue with multimodal hallucination and extended techniques, including Multimodal ICL (M-ICL), Multimodal CoT (M-CoT), and LLM-Aided Visual Reasoning (LAVR). To conclude the paper, we discuss existing challenges and point out promising research directions. In light of the fact that the era of MLLM has only just begun, we will keep updating this survey and hope it can inspire more research. An associated GitHub link collecting the latest papers is available at https://github.com/BradyFU/Awesome-Multimodal-Large-Language-Models.
In this paper, we introduce DiversiGATE, a unified framework that consolidates diverse methodologies for LLM verification. The proposed framework comprises two main components: Diversification and Aggregation which provide a holistic perspective on existing verification approaches, such as Self-Consistency, Math Prompter and WebGPT. Furthermore, we propose a novel `SelfLearner' model that conforms to the DiversiGATE framework which can learn from its own outputs and refine its performance over time, leading to improved accuracy. To evaluate the effectiveness of SelfLearner, we conducted a rigorous series of experiments, including tests on synthetic data as well as on popular arithmetic reasoning benchmarks such as GSM8K. Our results demonstrate that our approach outperforms traditional LLMs, achieving a considerable 54.8% -> 61.8% improvement on the GSM8K benchmark.
ChatGPT sets a new record with the fastest-growing user base, as a chatbot powered by a large language model (LLM). While it demonstrates state-of-the-art capabilities in a variety of language-generation tasks, it also raises widespread public concerns regarding its societal impact. In this paper, we investigated public attitudes towards ChatGPT by applying natural language processing techniques such as sentiment analysis and topic modeling to Twitter data from December 5, 2022 to June 10, 2023. Our sentiment analysis result indicates that the overall sentiment was largely neutral to positive, and negative sentiments were decreasing over time. Our topic model reveals that the most popular topics discussed were Education, Bard, Search Engines, OpenAI, Marketing, and Cybersecurity, but the ranking varies by month. We also analyzed the occupations of Twitter users and found that those with occupations in arts and entertainment tweeted aboutChatGPT most frequently. Additionally, people tended to tweet about topics relevant to their occupation. For instance, Cybersecurity is the most discussed topic among those with occupations related to computer and math, and Education is the most discussed topic among those in academic and research. Overall, our exploratory study provides insights into the public perception of ChatGPT, which could be valuable to both the general public and developers of this technology.
Solving math word problem (MWP) with AI techniques has recently made great progress with the success of deep neural networks (DNN), but it is far from being solved. We argue that the ability of learning by analogy is essential for an MWP solver to better understand same problems which may typically be formulated in diverse ways. However most existing works exploit the shortcut learning to train MWP solvers simply based on samples with a single question. In lack of diverse questions, these methods merely learn shallow heuristics. In this paper, we make a first attempt to solve MWPs by generating diverse yet consistent questions/equations. Given a typical MWP including the scenario description, question, and equation (i.e., answer), we first generate multiple consistent equations via a group of heuristic rules. We then feed them to a question generator together with the scenario to obtain the corresponding diverse questions, forming a new MWP with a variety of questions and equations. Finally we engage a data filter to remove those unreasonable MWPs, keeping the high-quality augmented ones. To evaluate the ability of learning by analogy for an MWP solver, we generate a new MWP dataset (called DiverseMath23K) with diverse questions by extending the current benchmark Math23K. Extensive experimental results demonstrate that our proposed method can generate high-quality diverse questions with corresponding equations, further leading to performance improvement on Diverse-Math23K. The code and dataset is available at: https://github.com/zhouzihao501/DiverseMWP
Lectures are a learning experience for both students and teachers. Students learn from teachers about the subject material, while teachers learn from students about how to refine their instruction. However, online student feedback is unstructured and abundant, making it challenging for teachers to learn and improve. We take a step towards tackling this challenge. First, we contribute a dataset for studying this problem: SIGHT is a large dataset of 288 math lecture transcripts and 15,784 comments collected from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology OpenCourseWare (MIT OCW) YouTube channel. Second, we develop a rubric for categorizing feedback types using qualitative analysis. Qualitative analysis methods are powerful in uncovering domain-specific insights, however they are costly to apply to large data sources. To overcome this challenge, we propose a set of best practices for using large language models (LLMs) to cheaply classify the comments at scale. We observe a striking correlation between the model's and humans' annotation: Categories with consistent human annotations (>$0.9$ inter-rater reliability, IRR) also display higher human-model agreement (>$0.7$), while categories with less consistent human annotations ($0.7$-$0.8$ IRR) correspondingly demonstrate lower human-model agreement ($0.3$-$0.5$). These techniques uncover useful student feedback from thousands of comments, costing around $\$0.002$ per comment. We conclude by discussing exciting future directions on using online student feedback and improving automated annotation techniques for qualitative research.