arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv 2402.08064cs.AIcs.CL
收藏

超越 LLMs:推进复杂推理的版图

Beyond LLMs: Advancing the Landscape of Complex Reasoning

Elemental Cognition

Jennifer Chu-Carroll, Andrew Beck, Greg Burnham, David OS Melville, David Nachman, A. Erdem Özcan, David Ferrucci

AI总结:

本文指出 LLMs 在解决约束满足与优化问题上的不足,提出基于神经符号方法的 EC AI 平台,结合高性能逻辑推理引擎与 LLMs,在构建、验证和修复解方面显著优于 LLMs。

摘要:

自几年前大型语言模型(LLMs)出现以来,它们常被视为许多 AI 问题的既定解决方案。然而,除了阻碍其在工业界广泛采用的诸多缺陷(如可靠性、成本和速度)外,LLMs 在一类常见的现实世界问题上表现不佳,即约束满足与优化问题。这些问题无处不在,且现有解决方案高度专业化,实施成本高昂。在 Elemental Cognition,我们开发了 EC AI 平台,采用神经符号方法来解决约束满足与优化问题。该平台的核心采用了一个精确且高性能的逻辑推理引擎,并利用 LLMs 进行知识获取和用户交互。该平台支持开发者以自然且简洁的语言指定应用逻辑,同时生成应用用户界面以有效地与用户交互。我们在三个领域对 LLMs 与基于 EC AI 平台构建的系统进行了评估,发现 EC AI 系统在构建有效且最优的解、验证提出的解以及修复无效解方面显著优于 LLMs。

英文摘要:

Since the advent of Large Language Models a few years ago, they have often been considered the de facto solution for many AI problems. However, in addition to the many deficiencies of LLMs that prevent them from broad industry adoption, such as reliability, cost, and speed, there is a whole class of common real world problems that Large Language Models perform poorly on, namely, constraint satisfaction and optimization problems. These problems are ubiquitous and current solutions are highly specialized and expensive to implement. At Elemental Cognition, we developed our EC AI platform which takes a neuro-symbolic approach to solving constraint satisfaction and optimization problems. The platform employs, at its core, a precise and high performance logical reasoning engine, and leverages LLMs for knowledge acquisition and user interaction. This platform supports developers in specifying application logic in natural and concise language while generating application user interfaces to interact with users effectively. We evaluated LLMs against systems built on the EC AI platform in three domains and found the EC AI systems to significantly outperform LLMs on constructing valid and optimal solutions, on validating proposed solutions, and on repairing invalid solutions.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑