arXiv:2412.05586cs.AIcs.LG2024-12被引 8

对比大模型与神经符号模型在抽象推理中的算术能力表现

Towards Learning to Reason: Comparing LLMs with Neuro-Symbolic on Arithmetic Relations in Abstract Reasoning

  • 用结构化文本描述视觉属性,隔离测试模型的抽象推理能力
  • 大模型在动态范围扩大时准确率降至10%以下,神经符号模型接近完美
  • 神经符号模型通过向量符号架构实现高精度算术推理,适合需要可解释计算的场景

本研究比较了大语言模型(LLMs)与神经符号方法在解决瑞文渐进矩阵(RPM)任务中的表现,该任务需理解如递推或算术加法等数学规则。通过直接提供视觉属性的文本提示(假设存在理想视觉感知模块),可独立评估模型的抽象推理能力。尽管使用了结构化输入和先进提示技术,GPT-4与Llama-3 70B在I-RAVEN数据集中心星座上均未达到完美准确率。分析表明,根源在于大模型对算术规则的理解与执行能力不足。为此,我们引入一种基于上下文感知的归纳规则学习器(ARLC),采用向量符号架构(VSAs)表示概念,通过向量点积定义相似性核,元素级运算实现加减操作。ARLC在中心星座上几乎达到完美准确率,展现出对算术规则的高保真建模。为检验模型长序列泛化能力,我们将测试扩展至3×10矩阵及属性值动态范围从10到1000。结果显示,大模型准确率降至10%以下,而ARLC因基于分布式表示模拟符号计算,仍能保持高准确率。代码已开源。

原文摘要 · Abstract (English)

This work compares large language models (LLMs) and neuro-symbolic approaches in solving Raven's progressive matrices (RPM), a visual abstract reasoning test that involves the understanding of mathematical rules such as progression or arithmetic addition. Providing the visual attributes directly as textual prompts, which assumes an oracle visual perception module, allows us to measure the model's abstract reasoning capability in isolation. Despite providing such compositionally structured representations from the oracle visual perception and advanced prompting techniques, both GPT-4 and Llama-3 70B cannot achieve perfect accuracy on the center constellation of the I-RAVEN dataset. Our analysis reveals that the root cause lies in the LLM's weakness in understanding and executing arithmetic rules. As a potential remedy, we analyze the Abductive Rule Learner with Context-awareness (ARLC), a neuro-symbolic approach that learns to reason with vector-symbolic architectures (VSAs). Here, concepts are represented with distributed vectors s.t. dot products between encoded vectors define a similarity kernel, and simple element-wise operations on the vectors perform addition/subtraction on the encoded values. We find that ARLC achieves almost perfect accuracy on the center constellation of I-RAVEN, demonstrating a high fidelity in arithmetic rules. To stress the length generalization capabilities of the models, we extend the RPM tests to larger matrices (3x10 instead of typical 3x3) and larger dynamic ranges of the attribute values (from 10 up to 1000). We find that the LLM's accuracy of solving arithmetic rules drops to sub-10%, especially as the dynamic range expands, while ARLC can maintain a high accuracy due to emulating symbolic computations on top of properly distributed representations. Our code is available at https://github.com/IBM/raven-large-language-models.

抽象推理神经符号算术规则大模型评测

Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。