Understanding Chain-of-Thought in LLMs Through Information Theory

27 Sept 2024 (modified: 05 Feb 2025)Submitted to ICLR 2025EveryoneRevisionsBibTeXCC BY 4.0
Keywords: Large Language models, Chain-of-thought
TL;DR: We formalize a framework for evaluating Chain of thought reasoning using Information theory, The proposed operationalised method allows us to detect failure modes in LLMs at a better rate than existing methods.
Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown impressive performance in complex reasoning tasks through the use of Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning, allowing models to break down problems into manageable sub-tasks. However, existing CoT evaluation techniques either require annotated CoT data or fall short in accurately assessing intermediate reasoning steps, leading to high rates of false positives. In this paper, we formalize CoT reasoning in LLMs through an information-theoretic lens. Specifically, our framework quantifies the `information gain' at each reasoning step, enabling the identification of failure modes in LLMs without the need for expensive annotated datasets. We demonstrate the efficacy of our approach through extensive experiments on toy and GSM-8K data, where it significantly outperforms existing outcome-based methods by providing more accurate insights into model performance on individual tasks.
Primary Area: foundation or frontier models, including LLMs
Code Of Ethics: I acknowledge that I and all co-authors of this work have read and commit to adhering to the ICLR Code of Ethics.
Submission Guidelines: I certify that this submission complies with the submission instructions as described on https://iclr.cc/Conferences/2025/AuthorGuide.
Anonymous Url: I certify that there is no URL (e.g., github page) that could be used to find authors’ identity.
No Acknowledgement Section: I certify that there is no acknowledgement section in this submission for double blind review.
Submission Number: 11554
Loading

OpenReview is a long-term project to advance science through improved peer review with legal nonprofit status. We gratefully acknowledge the support of the OpenReview Sponsors. © 2025 OpenReview