arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv 2406.12331cs.CLcs.AI
收藏

检索遇上推理:面向长文本理解的动态上下文内编辑

Retrieval Meets Reasoning: Dynamic In-Context Editing for Long-Text Understanding

Tsinghua University(清华大学);Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.(华为技术有限公司)

Weizhi Fei, Xueyan Niu, Guoqing Xie, Yanhua Zhang, Bo Bai, Lei Deng, Wei Han

AI总结:

针对大语言模型上下文长度受限难以进行长文本多跳推理的问题,提出动态上下文内编辑方法,将长文本视为可塑外部知识交互式整合信息,提升受限模型推理性能且降低成本。

摘要:

当前大语言模型(LLM)因预定义的上下文长度存在固有局限,这阻碍了其在大规模文本上下文中执行多跳推理的能力。尽管检索增强生成(RAG)等现有技术已尝试通过获取外部信息弥补这一差距,但在无法直接获得答案时,这些方法仍存在不足。受知识编辑领域近期突破的启发,我们提出了一种通过动态上下文内编辑重新构想信息检索的新方法。该方法将冗长上下文视为可塑的外部知识,交互式地收集并整合相关信息,从而使LLM能够执行复杂的推理步骤。实验结果表明,我们的方法有效赋能了受上下文限制的LLM(如Llama2)参与多跳推理,性能得到提升,优于最先进的上下文窗口外推方法,甚至可与更先进的商业长上下文模型相媲美。我们的交互式方法不仅增强了推理能力,还降低了相关的训练与计算成本,是提升LLM在广阔上下文中推理能力的实用方案。

英文摘要:

Current Large Language Models (LLMs) face inherent limitations due to their pre-defined context lengths, which impede their capacity for multi-hop reasoning within extensive textual contexts. While existing techniques like Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) have attempted to bridge this gap by sourcing external information, they fall short when direct answers are not readily available. We introduce a novel approach that re-imagines information retrieval through dynamic in-context editing, inspired by recent breakthroughs in knowledge editing. By treating lengthy contexts as malleable external knowledge, our method interactively gathers and integrates relevant information, thereby enabling LLMs to perform sophisticated reasoning steps. Experimental results demonstrate that our method effectively empowers context-limited LLMs, such as Llama2, to engage in multi-hop reasoning with improved performance, which outperforms state-of-the-art context window extrapolation methods and even compares favorably to more advanced commercial long-context models. Our interactive method not only enhances reasoning capabilities but also mitigates the associated training and computational costs, making it a pragmatic solution for enhancing LLMs' reasoning within expansive contexts.

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。

↑