HackerPapers

arXiv:2310.01798cs.CL

Large Language Models Cannot Self-Correct Reasoning Yet

Jie Huang, Xinyun Chen, Swaroop Mishra, Huaixiu Steven Zheng, Adams Wei Yu, Xinying Song, Denny Zhou

Abstract

Large Language Models (LLMs) have emerged as a groundbreaking technology with their unparalleled text generation capabilities across various applications. Nevertheless, concerns persist regarding the accuracy and appropriateness of their generated content. A contemporary methodology, self-correction, has been proposed as a remedy to these issues. Building upon this premise, this paper critically examines the role and efficacy of self-correction within LLMs, shedding light on its true potential and limitations. Central to our investigation is the notion of intrinsic self-correction, whereby an LLM attempts to correct its initial responses based solely on its inherent capabilities, without the crutch of external feedback. In the context of reasoning, our research indicates that LLMs struggle to self-correct their responses without external feedback, and at times, their performance even degrades after self-correction. Drawing from these insights, we offer suggestions for future research and practical applications in this field.

arXiv comments
ICLR 2024
Journal reference
DOI
Subjects
cs.CLComputation and Language cs.AIArtificial Intelligence

On Hacker News

Linked by 7 identifiable commenters in 9 comments across 8 threads, from Oct 2023 to Aug 2026. Found in 1 HN submission from Nov 2023 to Nov 2023. Open submission discussions.

Comments linking this paper, per year.

Discussed in comments8 threads

    • It does not work because the errors compound and also are most times correlated. "Nine Judges, Two Effective Votes: Correlated Errors Undermine LLM Evaluation Panels" - https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.29800 "From Spark to Fire: Modeling and Mitigating Error Cascades in LLM-Based…

      johnbarronView on HNParent context

    • But you can't read the original! That's why you built the pipeline in the first place! Only people who can read both versions can have a grounded opinion on whether or not the translation is accurate. C'mon man, I know criticisms of your baby feel like attacks on you, but take a…

      flirView on HNParent context

    • That works if the LLM has adequate external feedback from a terminal and browser in context with the past trial etc. It can't self-correct its own reasoning: https://arxiv.org/abs/2310.01798

      bofadeezView on HNParent context

    • Self-reflection and chain-of-thought are different things; CoT is about writing out the intermediate steps to an answer it can't immediately reach. Self-reflection doesn't work well though: https://arxiv.org/abs/2310.01798

      astrangeView on HNParent context

  1. GPT-4 Understands 1 comment
    • > The implications are vast. We may be able to translate between languages that have never had a “Rosetta Stone”. Any animals that have a true language could have it decoded. And while an LLM that’s gotten an 8 year old’s understanding of balancing assorted items isn’t that…

      rvzView on HNParent context

    • Pre-print https://arxiv.org/abs/2310.01798

      nyrikkiView on HNParent context

    • The paper: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2310.01798.pdf > Our research shows that LLMs are not yet capable of self-correcting their reasoning The paper actually just shows that the particular "self-correction" strategy and set of prompts they used doesn't help for the tasks they looked…

      montebicycleloView on HNParent context

Submitted to Hacker News

Connected through shared HN threads, not inferred similarity or a recommendation.