In everyday conversations, humans can take on different roles and adapt their vocabulary to their chosen roles. We explore whether LLMs can take on, that is impersonate, different roles when they generate text in-context.

Co-first author order is arbitrary and may be swapped when citing this work.

Existing methods like ensemble still struggle to aggregate these models with the desired higher-order communications. In this work, we propose Cola, a novel paradigm that coordinates multiple VLMs for visual reasoning.

Existing end-to-end approaches for relational reasoning typically extract entities from inputs by directly interpreting the latent feature representations as a set.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have become pivotal in addressing reasoning tasks across diverse domains, including arithmetic, commonsense, and symbolic reasoning. They utilize prompting techniques such as Exploration-of-Thought, Decomposition, and Refinement to effectively navigate and solve intricate tasks. Despite these advancements, the application of LLMs to Combinatorial Problems (CPs), known for their NP-hardness and critical roles in logistics and resource management remains underexplored. To address this gap, we introduce a novel prompting strategy: Self-Guiding Exploration (SGE), designed to enhance the performance of solving CPs. SGE operates autonomously, generating multiple thought trajectories for each CP task. It then breaks these trajectories down into actionable subtasks, executes them sequentially, and refines the results to ensure optimal outcomes. We present our research as the first to apply LLMs to a broad range of CPs and demonstrate that SGE outperforms existing prompting strategies by over 27.84% in CP optimization performance. Additionally, SGE achieves a 2.46% higher accuracy over the best existing results in other reasoning tasks (arithmetic, commonsense, and symbolic).

Zero-shot Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting emerges as a simple and effective strategy for enhancing the performance of large language models (LLMs) in real-world reasoning tasks. Nonetheless, the efficacy of a singular, task-level prompt uniformly applied across the whole of instances is inherently limited since one prompt cannot be a good partner for all, a more appropriate approach should consider the interaction between the prompt and each instance meticulously. This work introduces an instance-adaptive prompting algorithm as an alternative zero-shot CoT reasoning scheme by adaptively differentiating good and bad prompts. Concretely, we first employ analysis on LLMs through the lens of information flow to detect the mechanism under zero-shot CoT reasoning, in which we discover that information flows from question to prompt and question to rationale jointly influence the reasoning results most. We notice that a better zero-shot CoT reasoning needs the prompt to obtain semantic information from the question then the rationale aggregates sufficient information from the question directly and via the prompt indirectly. On the contrary, lacking any of those would probably lead to a bad one. Stem from that, we further propose an instance-adaptive prompting strategy (IAP) for zero-shot CoT reasoning. Experiments conducted with LLaMA-2, LLaMA-3, and Qwen on math, logic, and commonsense reasoning tasks (e.g., GSM8K, MMLU, Causal Judgement) obtain consistent improvement, demonstrating that the instance-adaptive zero-shot CoT prompting performs better than other task-level methods with some curated prompts or sophisticated procedures, showing the significance of our findings in the zero-shot CoT reasoning mechanism.

Auto-regressive large language models (LLMs) show impressive capacities to solve many complex reasoning tasks while struggling with some simple logical reasoning tasks such as inverse search: when trained on ''$A \to B$'' (e.g., *Tom is the parent of John*), LLM fails to directly conclude ''$B \gets A$'' (e.g., *John is the child of Tom*) during inference even if the two sentences are semantically identical, which is known as the ''reversal curse''. In this paper, we theoretically analyze the reversal curse via the training dynamics of (stochastic) gradient descent for two auto-regressive models: (1) a bilinear model that can be viewed as a simplification of a one-layer transformer; (2) one-layer transformers under certain assumptions. Our analysis reveals that for both models, the reversal curse is a consequence of the (effective) model weights *asymmetry*, i.e., the increase of weights from a token $A$ to token $B$ during training does not necessarily cause the increase of the weights from $B$ to $A$, which is caused by the training dynamics under certain choice of loss function and the optimization space of model parameters. Moreover, our analysis can be naturally applied to other logical reasoning tasks such as chain-of-thought (COT), which provides a new perspective different from previous work that focuses on expressivity. Finally, we conduct experiments to validate our theory on multi-layer transformers under different settings.