pith. sign in

arxiv: 2310.12342 · v2 · pith:UFZJWNEFnew · submitted 2023-10-18 · 💻 cs.CL · cs.AI

Eliminating Reasoning via Inferring with Planning: A New Framework to Guide LLMs' Non-linear Thinking

classification 💻 cs.CL cs.AI
keywords llmstextbflogicthinkinghumanlinearmarbprocesses
0
0 comments X
read the original abstract

Chain-of-Thought(CoT) prompting and its variants explore equipping large language models (LLMs) with high-level reasoning abilities by emulating human-like linear cognition and logic. However, the human mind is complicated and mixed with both linear and nonlinear thinking. In this work, we propose \textbf{I}nferential \textbf{E}xclusion \textbf{P}rompting (IEP), a novel prompting that combines the principles of elimination and inference in order to guide LLMs to think non-linearly. IEP guides LLMs to plan and then utilize Natural Language Inference (NLI) to deduce each possible solution's entailment relation with context, commonsense, or facts, therefore yielding a broader perspective by thinking back for inferring. This forward planning and backward eliminating process allows IEP to better simulate the complex human thinking processes compared to other CoT-based methods, which only reflect linear cognitive processes. We conducted a series of empirical studies and have corroborated that IEP consistently outperforms CoT across various tasks. Additionally, we observe that integrating IEP and CoT further improves the LLMs' performance on certain tasks, highlighting the necessity of equipping LLMs with mixed logic processes. Moreover, to better evaluate comprehensive features inherent in human logic, we introduce \textbf{M}ental-\textbf{A}bility \textbf{R}easoning \textbf{B}enchmark (MARB). The benchmark comprises six novel subtasks with a total of 9,115 questions, among which 1,685 are developed with hand-crafted rationale references. We believe both \textsc{IEP} and \textsc{MARB} can serve as a promising direction for unveiling LLMs' logic and verbal reasoning abilities and drive further advancements. \textsc{MARB} will be available at ~\texttt{anonymity link} soon.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Cracking the Code of Juxtaposition: Can AI Models Understand the Humorous Contradictions

    cs.CL 2024-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Introduces YesBut benchmark showing state-of-the-art multimodal models lag humans on interpreting humorous contradictions in comics.

  2. When 'YES' Meets 'BUT': Can Large Models Comprehend Contradictory Humor Through Comparative Reasoning?

    cs.CV 2025-03 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Presents YesBut (V2) benchmark and shows state-of-the-art VLMs significantly underperform humans on tasks requiring comparative reasoning for contradictory humor in comics.

  3. Beyond Math: Stories as a Testbed for Memorization-Constrained Reasoning in LLMs

    cs.CL 2024-12 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Introduces a mitigation technique that drops LLM accuracy on popular fiction character tasks from 96% to 72% by limiting verbatim memorization while retaining gist cues.