Groundedness in Retrieval-augmented Long-form Generation: An Empirical Study

We present an empirical study of groundedness in long-form question answering (LFQA) by retrieval-augmented large language models (LLMs). In particular, we evaluate whether every generated sentence is grounded in the retrieved documents or the model's pre-training data. Across 3 datasets and 4 model families, our findings reveal that a significant fraction of generated sentences are consistently ungrounded, even when those sentences contain correct ground-truth answers. Additionally, we examine the impacts of factors such as model size, decoding strategy, and instruction tuning on groundedness. Our results show that while larger models tend to ground their outputs more effectively, a significant portion of correct answers remains compromised by hallucinations. This study provides novel insights into the groundedness challenges in LFQA and underscores the necessity for more robust mechanisms in LLMs to mitigate the generation of ungrounded content.

Do Language Models Exhibit the Same Cognitive Biases in Problem Solving as Human Learners?

There is increasing interest in employing large language models (LLMs) as cognitive models. For such purposes, it is central to understand which cognitive properties are well-modeled by LLMs, and which are not. In this work, we study the biases of LLMs in relation to those known in children when solving arithmetic word problems. Surveying the learning science literature, we posit that the problem-solving process can be split into three distinct steps: text comprehension, solution planning and solution execution. We construct tests for each one in order to understand which parts of this process can be faithfully modeled by current state-of-the-art LLMs. We generate a novel set of word problems for each of these tests, using a neuro-symbolic method that enables fine-grained control over the problem features. We find evidence that LLMs, with and without instruction-tuning, exhibit human-like biases in both the text-comprehension and the solution-planning steps of the solving process, but not during the final step which relies on the problem's arithmetic expressions (solution execution).

Towards a Mechanistic Interpretation of Multi-Step Reasoning Capabilities of Language Models

Recent work has shown that language models (LMs) have strong multi-step (i.e., procedural) reasoning capabilities. However, it is unclear whether LMs perform these tasks by cheating with answers memorized from pretraining corpus, or, via a multi-step reasoning mechanism. In this paper, we try to answer this question by exploring a mechanistic interpretation of LMs for multi-step reasoning tasks. Concretely, we hypothesize that the LM implicitly embeds a reasoning tree resembling the correct reasoning process within it. We test this hypothesis by introducing a new probing approach (called MechanisticProbe) that recovers the reasoning tree from the model's attention patterns. We use our probe to analyze two LMs: GPT-2 on a synthetic task (k-th smallest element), and LLaMA on two simple language-based reasoning tasks (ProofWriter & AI2 Reasoning Challenge). We show that MechanisticProbe is able to detect the information of the reasoning tree from the model's attentions for most examples, suggesting that the LM indeed is going through a process of multi-step reasoning within its architecture in many cases.

Understanding Arithmetic Reasoning in Language Models using Causal Mediation Analysis

Mathematical reasoning in large language models (LLMs) has garnered attention in recent research, but there is limited understanding of how these models process and store information related to arithmetic tasks. In this paper, we present a mechanistic interpretation of LLMs for arithmetic-based questions using a causal mediation analysis framework. By intervening on the activations of specific model components and measuring the resulting changes in predicted probabilities, we identify the subset of parameters responsible for specific predictions. We analyze two pre-trained language models with different sizes (2.8B and 6B parameters). Experimental results reveal that a small set of mid-late layers significantly affect predictions for arithmetic-based questions, with distinct activation patterns for correct and wrong predictions. We also investigate the role of the attention mechanism and compare the model's activation patterns for arithmetic queries with the prediction of factual knowledge. Our findings provide insights into the mechanistic interpretation of LLMs for arithmetic tasks and highlight the specific components involved in arithmetic reasoning.

Distilling Multi-Step Reasoning Capabilities of Large Language Models into Smaller Models via Semantic Decompositions

Step-by-step reasoning approaches like chain-of-thought (CoT) have proved to be a very effective technique to induce reasoning capabilities in large language models. However, the success of the CoT approach depends primarily on model size, and often billion parameter-scale models are needed to get CoT to work. In this paper, we propose a knowledge distillation approach, that leverages the step-by-step CoT reasoning capabilities of larger models and distils these reasoning abilities into smaller models. Our approach Decompositional Distillation learns a semantic decomposition of the original problem into a sequence of subproblems and uses it to train two models: a) a problem decomposer that learns to decompose the complex reasoning problem into a sequence of simpler sub-problems and b) a problem solver that uses the intermediate subproblems to solve the overall problem. On a multi-step math word problem dataset (GSM8K), we boost the performance of GPT-2 variants up to 35% when distilled with our approach compared to CoT. We show that using our approach, it is possible to train a GPT-2-large model (775M) that can outperform a 10X larger GPT-3 (6B) model trained using CoT reasoning. Finally, we also demonstrate that our approach of problem decomposition can also be used as an alternative to CoT prompting, which boosts the GPT-3 performance by 40% compared to CoT prompts.

Longtonotes: OntoNotes with Longer Coreference Chains

Ontonotes has served as the most important benchmark for coreference resolution. However, for ease of annotation, several long documents in Ontonotes were split into smaller parts. In this work, we build a corpus of coreference-annotated documents of significantly longer length than what is currently available. We do so by providing an accurate, manually-curated, merging of annotations from documents that were split into multiple parts in the original Ontonotes annotation process. The resulting corpus, which we call LongtoNotes contains documents in multiple genres of the English language with varying lengths, the longest of which are up to 8x the length of documents in Ontonotes, and 2x those in Litbank. We evaluate state-of-the-art neural coreference systems on this new corpus, analyze the relationships between model architectures/hyperparameters and document length on performance and efficiency of the models, and demonstrate areas of improvement in long-document coreference modeling revealed by our new corpus. Our data and code is available at: https://github.com/kumar-shridhar/LongtoNotes.