Abstract:The reasoning abilities of large language models (LLMs) have improved with chain-of-thought (CoT) prompting, allowing models to solve complex tasks in a stepwise manner. However, training CoT capabilities requires detailed reasoning data, which is often scarce. The self-taught reasoner (STaR) framework addresses this by using reinforcement learning to automatically generate reasoning steps, reducing reliance on human-labeled data. Although STaR and its variants have demonstrated empirical success, a theoretical foundation explaining these improvements is lacking. This work provides a theoretical framework for understanding the effectiveness of reinforcement learning on CoT reasoning and STaR. Our contributions are: (1) an analysis of policy improvement, showing why LLM reasoning improves iteratively with STaR; (2) conditions for convergence to an optimal reasoning policy; (3) an examination of STaR's robustness, explaining how it can improve reasoning even when incorporating occasional incorrect steps; and (4) criteria for the quality of pre-trained models necessary to initiate effective reasoning improvement. This framework aims to bridge empirical findings with theoretical insights, advancing reinforcement learning approaches for reasoning in LLMs.

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

### Problems the Paper Attempts to Solve This paper aims to address the theoretical foundations of large language models (LLMs) in their chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning capabilities. Specifically, the paper focuses on the following points: 1. **Strategy Improvement**: Why do large language models (LLMs) improve their reasoning capabilities with each iteration of the Self-Taught Reasoner (STaR)? 2. **Convergence to Optimal Strategy**: If there exists an optimal reasoning model, can STaR find this optimal reasoner in an infinite number of iterations? 3. **Existence of Erroneous Reasoning Steps**: In STaR, even if the model generates some erroneous reasoning steps, it can still arrive at the correct answer. These erroneous steps are included in the training data, so why does STaR still enhance the reasoning capabilities of LLMs? 4. **Quality of Pre-trained Models**: Since STaR requires a pre-trained LLM to guide the discovery of reasoning steps in the first iteration, how capable does the pre-trained LLM need to be to effectively initiate the reasoning improvement process? ### Background - **Chain-of-Thought (CoT)**: By providing step-by-step guidance, LLMs can handle more complex reasoning tasks. However, training models with CoT capabilities requires detailed reasoning data, which is often scarce. - **Self-Taught Reasoner (STaR)**: Utilizes reinforcement learning to automatically discover reasoning steps, reducing reliance on manually annotated data. Although STaR and its variants have achieved empirical success, there is a lack of theoretical foundation to explain these improvements. ### Research Contributions - **Strategy Improvement Analysis**: Explains why LLMs improve their reasoning capabilities with each STaR iteration. - **Convergence Conditions**: Provides conditions for convergence to the optimal reasoning strategy. - **Robustness Analysis**: Explains how STaR can improve reasoning capabilities even when occasional erroneous steps are included. - **Quality Standards for Pre-trained Models**: Determines the quality standards of pre-trained models required to initiate effective reasoning improvement. ### Theoretical Framework - **Problem Modeling**: Models the CoT reasoning process as a reinforcement learning problem, defining states, actions, and reward functions. - **Algorithm Implementation**: Describes the implementation of the RL-STaR algorithm in detail, including how to generate reasoning paths and train strategies. - **Theoretical Results**: Through mathematical derivation, proves that the RL-STaR algorithm improves the model's reasoning capabilities with each iteration and eventually converges to the optimal strategy. ### Limitations - **Markov Property**: Assumes that the LLM receives only the current state as input at each step, without relying on previous states, which differs from CoT methods in practical applications. - **Deterministic Ground Truth Reasoning Trajectories**: Assumes that each question-answer pair has only one ground truth reasoning trajectory, which may be overly simplified in practical applications. Through this research, the paper aims to bridge the gap between empirical findings and theoretical insights, advancing the application of reinforcement learning in LLMs' reasoning.

RL-STaR: Theoretical Analysis of Reinforcement Learning Frameworks for Self-Taught Reasoner

V-STaR: Training Verifiers for Self-Taught Reasoners

Lean-STaR: Learning to Interleave Thinking and Proving

Quiet-STaR: Language Models Can Teach Themselves to Think Before Speaking

LLM Reasoners: New Evaluation, Library, and Analysis of Step-by-Step Reasoning with Large Language Models

Thought-Like-Pro: Enhancing Reasoning of Large Language Models through Self-Driven Prolog-based Chain-of-Thought

Let's Be Self-generated via Step by Step: A Curriculum Learning Approach to Automated Reasoning with Large Language Models

Strategic Chain-of-Thought: Guiding Accurate Reasoning in LLMs through Strategy Elicitation

Language Models are Hidden Reasoners: Unlocking Latent Reasoning Capabilities via Self-Rewarding

LaRS: Latent Reasoning Skills for Chain-of-Thought Reasoning

Mutual Reasoning Makes Smaller LLMs Stronger Problem-Solvers

RCOT: Detecting and Rectifying Factual Inconsistency in Reasoning by Reversing Chain-of-Thought

ChainLM: Empowering Large Language Models with Improved Chain-of-Thought Prompting

Critic-CoT: Boosting the reasoning abilities of large language model via Chain-of-thoughts Critic

CoT Rerailer: Enhancing the Reliability of Large Language Models in Complex Reasoning Tasks through Error Detection and Correction

On the Hardness of Faithful Chain-of-Thought Reasoning in Large Language Models

Technical Report: Enhancing LLM Reasoning with Reward-guided Tree Search

How Likely Do LLMs with CoT Mimic Human Reasoning?

ReFT: Reasoning with Reinforced Fine-Tuning

REL: Working out is all you need