ProofWriter: Generating Implications, Proofs, and Abductive Statements over Natural Language
read the original abstract
Transformers have been shown to emulate logical deduction over natural language theories (logical rules expressed in natural language), reliably assigning true/false labels to candidate implications. However, their ability to generate implications of a theory has not yet been demonstrated, and methods for reconstructing proofs of answers are imperfect. In this work we show that a generative model, called ProofWriter, can reliably generate both implications of a theory and the natural language proof(s) that support them. In particular, iterating a 1-step implication generator results in proofs that are highly reliable, and represent actual model decisions (rather than post-hoc rationalizations). On the RuleTaker dataset, the accuracy of ProofWriter's proofs exceed previous methods by +9% absolute, and in a way that generalizes to proof depths unseen in training and on out-of-domain problems. We also show that generative techniques can perform a type of abduction with high precision: Given a theory and an unprovable conclusion, identify a missing fact that allows the conclusion to be proved, along with a proof. These results significantly improve the viability of neural methods for systematically reasoning over natural language.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet.
Forward citations
Cited by 5 Pith papers
-
Chain-of-Verification Reduces Hallucination in Large Language Models
Chain-of-Verification reduces hallucinations in large language models by drafting responses, planning independent verification questions, answering them separately, and generating a final verified output.
-
Reasoning with Language Model is Planning with World Model
RAP turns LLMs into dual world-model and planning agents via MCTS to generate better reasoning paths, outperforming CoT baselines and achieving 33% relative gains over GPT-4 CoT using LLaMA-33B on plan generation.
-
Solving math word problems with process- and outcome-based feedback
On GSM8K, outcome-based supervision achieves similar final-answer error rates to process-based with less labeling, but process-based or learned reward models are needed to reach 3.4% reasoning error among correct solutions.
-
Semantic-Aware Logical Reasoning via a Semiotic Framework
LogicAgent uses a semiotic-square-guided approach to enhance logical reasoning in LLMs on the new RepublicQA benchmark and others, reporting average gains of 6.25% and 7.05% respectively.
-
Is Large Language Model Performance on Reasoning Tasks Impacted by Different Ways Questions Are Asked?
LLM accuracy on reasoning tasks differs significantly by question type, with step-by-step reasoning accuracy often uncorrelated to final answer selection.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.