When do you need Chain-of-Thought Prompting for ChatGPT?
AI-generated Key Points
- Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting is effective in eliciting complex multi-step reasoning from Large Language Models (LLMs)
- Adding the CoT instruction "Let's think step-by-step" improved GPT-3's accuracy from 17.7% to 78.7%
- CoT is no longer effective for certain tasks like arithmetic reasoning on ChatGPT, but still effective on other reasoning tasks
- ChatGPT may have already been trained on these tasks with CoT and thus memorized the instruction, highlighting a potential risk of overfitting/bias toward instructions introduced in IFT
- ChatGPT demonstrates strong reasoning capability without the guidance of CoT prompting for arithmetic reasoning tasks, suggesting that some arithmetic datasets may be included in the pre-training mix
- The study sheds light on the importance of understanding LLMs' behavior in reasoning tasks and highlights potential risks associated with IFT and pretraining dataset leakage
Authors: Jiuhai Chen, Lichang Chen, Heng Huang, Tianyi Zhou
Abstract: Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting can effectively elicit complex multi-step reasoning from Large Language Models~(LLMs). For example, by simply adding CoT instruction ``Let's think step-by-step'' to each input query of MultiArith dataset, GPT-3's accuracy can be improved from 17.7\% to 78.7\%. However, it is not clear whether CoT is still effective on more recent instruction finetuned (IFT) LLMs such as ChatGPT. Surprisingly, on ChatGPT, CoT is no longer effective for certain tasks such as arithmetic reasoning while still keeping effective on other reasoning tasks. Moreover, on the former tasks, ChatGPT usually achieves the best performance and can generate CoT even without being instructed to do so. Hence, it is plausible that ChatGPT has already been trained on these tasks with CoT and thus memorized the instruction so it implicitly follows such an instruction when applied to the same queries, even without CoT. Our analysis reflects a potential risk of overfitting/bias toward instructions introduced in IFT, which becomes more common in training LLMs. In addition, it indicates possible leakage of the pretraining recipe, e.g., one can verify whether a dataset and instruction were used in training ChatGPT. Our experiments report new baseline results of ChatGPT on a variety of reasoning tasks and shed novel insights into LLM's profiling, instruction memorization, and pretraining dataset leakage.
Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant
You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.
Assess the quality of the AI-generated content by voting
Score: 1
Why do we need votes?
Votes are used to determine whether we need to re-run our summarizing tools. If the count reaches -10, our tools can be restarted.
The previous summary was created more than a year ago and can be re-run (if necessary) by clicking on the Run button below.
Similar papers summarized with our AI tools
Navigate through even more similar papers through a
tree representationLook for similar papers (in beta version)
By clicking on the button above, our algorithm will scan all papers in our database to find the closest based on the contents of the full papers and not just on metadata. Please note that it only works for papers that we have generated summaries for and you can rerun it from time to time to get a more accurate result while our database grows.
Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.