It has been well-known that Chain-of-Thought can remarkably enhance LLMs' performance on complex tasks. However, because it also introduces slower inference speeds and higher computational costs, many researches have attempted to use implicit CoT, which does not need LLMs to explicitly generate the intermediate steps. However, the invisible reasoning process leaves us a doubt that, can implicit CoT really be equal to explicit CoT? Therefore, in this study, we address this question through experiments. We probe the information of intermediate steps from the model's hidden states when it is either trained or prompted to perform implicit CoT. The results surprisingly indicate that when prompted, LLMs hardly think about intermediate steps, suggesting they may just rely on experience rather than strict step-by-step reasoning. But when trained, they indeed calculate intermediate steps. Moreover, in both situations, we find the effect of using implicit CoT is susceptible to the format of the problem, reaffirming the current deficiency of implicit CoT.
Do LLMs Really Think Step-by-step In Implicit Reasoning?
Experiments exploring implicit Chain-of-Thought in LLMs suggest that models do not engage in step-by-step reasoning and rely more on experience, highlighting the continued importance of explicit CoT for complex tasks.
- Year
- 2024
- Venue
- arXiv 2024
- Authors
- 1
- Hosting
- Abstract onlyARXIV-DEFAULT
Cite
Notes
Only stored in your browser.
Attribution
- Abstract & full text
- arxiv.org/abs/2411.15862v4ARXIV-DEFAULT
- TL;DR
- Semantic Scholar