about
Iterative reasoning preference optimization (arxiv.org)
19 points by Jimmc414 on May 1, 2024 | hide | past | pdf | 4 comments on HN

In plain words: The model repeatedly compares its step-by-step solutions, learning to favor the reasoning steps that reach the right answer over those that don't, using only its training examples. Grade-school math accuracy rose from 55.6% to 81.6%, the best among similar models using no extra data.

Abstract · Iterative Reasoning Preference Optimization

Iterative preference optimization methods have recently been shown to perform well for general instruction tuning tasks, but typically make little improvement on reasoning tasks (Yuan et al., 2024, Chen et al., 2024). In this work we develop an iterative approach that optimizes the preference between competing generated Chain-of-Thought (CoT) candidates by optimizing for winning vs. losing reasoning steps that lead to the correct answer. We train using a modified DPO loss (Rafailov et al., 2023) with an additional negative log-likelihood term, which we find to be crucial. We show reasoning improves across repeated iterations of this scheme. While only relying on examples in the training set, our approach results in increasing accuracy on GSM8K, MATH, and ARC-Challenge for Llama-2-70B-Chat, outperforming other Llama-2-based models not relying on additionally sourced datasets. For example, we see a large improvement from 55.6% to 81.6% on GSM8K and an accuracy of 88.7% with majority voting out of 32 samples.

Richard Yuanzhe Pang, Weizhe Yuan, Kyunghyun Cho, He He, Sainbayar Sukhbaatar, Jason Weston
arXiv:2404.19733 · cs.CL, cs.AI · submitted Apr 30, 2024 · updated Jun 26, 2024
abstract · pdf · html

add comment on HN
Also discussed: May 2024 (2 points, 0 comments)

Create chain-of-thought candidates with LLM, form preference pairs depending on whether the answers are correct, train using DPO and NLL, then repeat the cycle.

Apparently this takes Llama-2-70B-chat from 55.6% to 81.6% on the GSM8k benchmark

Also, similar to Orca-Math but without a teacher model. They also followed an iterative DPO/KTO scheme, but with no length normalized NLL loss term.
If we had a magical (fast) oracle for grading responses, have people done search/expert iteration for LLMs?

Specifically for codegen, i am playing with an iterative interpreter that can quickly (re)evaluate a tree of similar responses

thank you for your service