We propose a self-consistency method to improve the reasoning accuracy of large language models. We observe that in tasks requiring deliberate thinking, there are often multiple ways to arrive at the correct answer. To simulate this process in language models, we sample a diverse set of outputs from the model's decoder. These outputs represent different reasoning paths that lead to the same answer. While some of these paths may be incorrect or contain mistakes, we hypothesize that correct reasoning processes tend to have greater agreement in their final answer. To implement self-consistency, we first prompt the language model with a set of manually written chain of thought exemplars. Then, we sample a set of candidate outputs from the model's decoder which introduces diversity in the generated reasoning paths. Finally, we ensemble the results by selecting the most consistent answer among the generated answers. In our experimental investigation, we combine chain of thought prompting with self-consistency and demonstrate substantial improvements compared to using chain of thought alone with a single generated path. For arithmetic and commonsense reasoning benchmarks such as GSM8K (+10%), SVAMP (+14%), MultiArith (+24%), CommonsenseQA (+5%) and ARC (easy +4%, challenge +5%), self-consistency consistently yields significant accuracy improvements across various datasets. Our approach leverages natural diversity in human thinking processes and applies it to language models through ensembling diverse reasoning paths leading to improved reasoning accuracy and potential applications in various domains where accurate reasoning is crucial.
- - Proposed self-consistency method to improve reasoning accuracy of large language models
- - Multiple ways to arrive at correct answer in tasks requiring deliberate thinking
- - Simulate this process by sampling diverse set of outputs from model's decoder representing different reasoning paths
- - Hypothesize that correct reasoning processes have greater agreement in final answer
- - Implement self-consistency by prompting model with manually written chain of thought exemplars and sampling candidate outputs for diversity
- - Ensemble results by selecting most consistent answer among generated answers
- - Experimental investigation showed substantial improvements compared to using chain of thought alone with single path
- - Self-consistency consistently improved accuracy across various datasets for arithmetic and commonsense reasoning benchmarks
- - Approach leverages natural diversity in human thinking processes and applies it to language models for improved reasoning accuracy
Researchers proposed a new method to make big language models think more accurately. They found that there are many different ways to get the right answer when thinking carefully. To help the models think like humans, they made them try out different ways of thinking by giving them different examples. They also noticed that when people reason correctly, they usually agree on the final answer. So, they made the models think in a consistent way by giving them examples and choosing the most similar answers. When they tested this method, they found that it improved accuracy a lot compared to just using one example and one way of thinking. This approach uses the natural diversity in how people think to help language models be better at reasoning."
Definitions- Proposed: Suggested or came up with an idea
- Self-consistency: Thinking in a way that is logical and makes sense
- Reasoning: Thinking carefully and logically
- Accuracy: Being correct or exact
- Language models: Computer programs that understand and generate human-like language
Improving Reasoning Accuracy of Large Language Models with Self-Consistency
In recent years, language models have become increasingly powerful and are now used in a variety of applications. However, when it comes to tasks requiring deliberate thinking such as arithmetic and commonsense reasoning, language models often struggle to reach the same level of accuracy as humans. To address this issue, researchers from Google Brain propose a self-consistency method that improves the reasoning accuracy of large language models.
The Problem: Multiple Ways to Reach the Same Answer
When solving problems that require deliberate thinking, there are often multiple ways to arrive at the correct answer. This is due to the natural diversity in human thought processes which allows us to consider different perspectives and come up with creative solutions. Unfortunately, current language models lack this ability since they only generate one output path for each task. As a result, these models are unable to capture all possible reasoning paths leading to the right answer and thus fail on certain tasks where multiple paths exist.
Self-Consistency Methodology
To simulate human thought processes in language models, researchers propose a self-consistency method which samples diverse outputs from the model's decoder and ensembles them together by selecting the most consistent answer among generated answers. The process consists of three steps:
1) Prompting with manually written chain of thought exemplars;
2) Sampling candidate outputs from model's decoder;
3) Ensembling results by selecting most consistent answer among generated answers.
In addition, researchers combine chain of thought prompting with self-consistency for further improvements in accuracy compared to using chain of thought alone with single generated path.
Experimental Investigation & Results
Researchers conducted experiments on various datasets including GSM8K (+10%), SVAMP (+14%), MultiArith (+24%), CommonsenseQA (+5%) and ARC (easy +4%, challenge +5%). Their findings showed that self-consistency consistently yields significant accuracy improvements across all datasets compared to previous methods without self-consistency applied.
Conclusion & Potential Applications
This research demonstrates how leveraging natural diversity in human thinking processes can be applied through ensembling diverse reasoning paths leading to improved reasoning accuracy in large language models. This approach has potential applications in various domains where accurate reasoning is crucial such as medical diagnosis or legal analysis systems where mistakes may have serious consequences if not corrected quickly enough by an expert system or AI agent trained using this methodology