LLM as a Mastermind: A Survey of Strategic Reasoning with Large Language Models

This paper presents a comprehensive survey of the current status and opportunities for Large Language Models (LLMs) in strategic reasoning, a sophisticated form of reasoning that necessitates understanding and predicting adversary actions in multi-agent settings while adjusting strategies accordingly. Strategic reasoning is distinguished by its focus on the dynamic and uncertain nature of interactions among multi-agents, where comprehending the environment and anticipating the behavior of others is crucial. We explore the scopes, applications, methodologies, and evaluation metrics related to strategic reasoning with LLMs, highlighting the burgeoning development in this area and the interdisciplinary approaches enhancing their decision-making performance. It aims to systematize and clarify the scattered literature on this subject, providing a systematic review that underscores the importance of strategic reasoning as a critical cognitive capability and offers insights into future research directions and potential improvements.

Will GPT-4 Run DOOM?

We show that GPT-4's reasoning and planning capabilities extend to the 1993 first-person shooter Doom. This large language model (LLM) is able to run and play the game with only a few instructions, plus a textual description--generated by the model itself from screenshots--about the state of the game being observed. We find that GPT-4 can play the game to a passable degree: it is able to manipulate doors, combat enemies, and perform pathing. More complex prompting strategies involving multiple model calls provide better results. While further work is required to enable the LLM to play the game as well as its classical, reinforcement learning-based counterparts, we note that GPT-4 required no training, leaning instead on its own reasoning and observational capabilities. We hope our work pushes the boundaries on intelligent, LLM-based agents in video games. We conclude by discussing the ethical implications of our work.

On Meta-Prompting

Certain statistical models are capable of interpreting input strings as instructions, or prompts, and carry out tasks based on them. Many approaches to prompting and pre-training these models involve the automated generation of these prompts. We call these approaches meta-prompting, or prompting to obtain prompts. We propose a theoretical framework based on category theory to generalize and describe them. This framework is flexible enough to account for LLM stochasticity; and allows us to obtain formal results around task agnosticity and equivalence of various meta-prompting approaches. We experiment with meta-prompting in two active areas of model research: creativity and ideation. We find that user preference favors (p < 0.01) the prompts generated under meta-prompting, as well as their corresponding outputs, over a series of hardcoded baseline prompts that include the original task prompt. Using our framework, we argue that meta-prompting is more effective than basic prompting at generating desirable outputs.

I Wish to Have an Argument: Argumentative Reasoning in Large Language Models

We evaluate the ability of contemporary large language models (LLMs) to perform argumentative reasoning. We frame our experiments in terms of the argument mining (AM) and argument pair extraction (APE) tasks, and evaluate their ability to perform reasoning at increasing levels of abstraction in the input and output representations (e.g., arbitrary label sets, semantic graphs). We find that, although LLMs are able to match or surpass the state-of-the-art in AM and APE, their argumentative reasoning performance is very dependent on the input and output representation. We also find an "exemplar effect", where too many exemplars increasingly become detrimental for task performance, and about 4-5 being the optimal amount. Neither result extends to chain-of-thought (CoT) prompting: we find the exemplar effect to be nullified, and our results suggest that CoT allows for better performance under ill-conditioned problems. We hope that the work reported contributes to the improvement of argumentative reasoning in LLMs.

Are Large Language Model-based Evaluators the Solution to Scaling Up Multilingual Evaluation?

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive performance on Natural Language Processing (NLP) tasks, such as Question Answering, Summarization, and Classification. The use of LLMs as evaluators, that can rank or score the output of other models (usually LLMs) has become increasingly popular, due to the limitations of current evaluation techniques including the lack of appropriate benchmarks, metrics, cost, and access to human annotators. While LLMs are capable of handling approximately 100 languages, the majority of languages beyond the top 20 lack systematic evaluation across various tasks, metrics, and benchmarks. This creates an urgent need to scale up multilingual evaluation to ensure a precise understanding of LLM performance across diverse languages. LLM-based evaluators seem like the perfect solution to this problem, as they do not require human annotators, human-created references, or benchmarks and can theoretically be used to evaluate any language covered by the LLM. In this paper, we investigate whether LLM-based evaluators can help scale up multilingual evaluation. Specifically, we calibrate LLM-based evaluation against 20k human judgments of five metrics across three text-generation tasks in eight languages. Our findings indicate that LLM-based evaluators may exhibit bias towards higher scores and should be used with caution and should always be calibrated with a dataset of native speaker judgments, particularly in low-resource and non-Latin script languages.

A User-Centered Evaluation of Spanish Text Simplification

We present an evaluation of text simplification (TS) in Spanish for a production system, by means of two corpora focused in both complex-sentence and complex-word identification. We compare the most prevalent Spanish-specific readability scores with neural networks, and show that the latter are consistently better at predicting user preferences regarding TS. As part of our analysis, we find that multilingual models underperform against equivalent Spanish-only models on the same task, yet all models focus too often on spurious statistical features, such as sentence length. We release the corpora in our evaluation to the broader community with the hopes of pushing forward the state-of-the-art in Spanish natural language processing.

An Evaluation on Large Language Model Outputs: Discourse and Memorization

We present an empirical evaluation of various outputs generated by nine of the most widely-available large language models (LLMs). Our analysis is done with off-the-shelf, readily-available tools. We find a correlation between percentage of memorized text, percentage of unique text, and overall output quality, when measured with respect to output pathologies such as counterfactual and logically-flawed statements, and general failures like not staying on topic. Overall, 80.0% of the outputs evaluated contained memorized data, but outputs containing the most memorized content were also more likely to be considered of high quality. We discuss and evaluate mitigation strategies, showing that, in the models evaluated, the rate of memorized text being output is reduced. We conclude with a discussion on potential implications around what it means to learn, to memorize, and to evaluate quality text.

Turing Completeness and Sid Meier's Civilization

We prove that three strategy video games from the Sid Meier's Civilization series: Sid Meier's Civilization: Beyond Earth, Sid Meier's Civilization V, and Sid Meier's Civilization VI, are Turing complete. We achieve this by building three universal Turing machines-one for each game-using only the elements present in the games, and using their internal rules and mechanics as the transition function. The existence of such machines imply that under the assumptions made, the games are undecidable. We show constructions of these machines within a running game session, and we provide a sample execution of an algorithm-the three-state Busy Beaver-with one of our machines.

Optimal Subarchitecture Extraction For BERT

We extract an optimal subset of architectural parameters for the BERT architecture from Devlin et al. (2018) by applying recent breakthroughs in algorithms for neural architecture search. This optimal subset, which we refer to as "Bort", is demonstrably smaller, having an effective (that is, not counting the embedding layer) size of $5.5\%$ the original BERT-large architecture, and $16\%$ of the net size. Bort is also able to be pretrained in $288$ GPU hours, which is $1.2\%$ of the time required to pretrain the highest-performing BERT parametric architectural variant, RoBERTa-large (Liu et al., 2019), and about $33\%$ of that of the world-record, in GPU hours, required to train BERT-large on the same hardware. It is also $7.9$x faster on a CPU, as well as being better performing than other compressed variants of the architecture, and some of the non-compressed variants: it obtains performance improvements of between $0.3\%$ and $31\%$, absolute, with respect to BERT-large, on multiple public natural language understanding (NLU) benchmarks.