How Do LLMs Perform Two-Hop Reasoning in Context?
Fuente:
arXiv
Guardado en:
| Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | Preprint |
| Publicado: |
2025
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| _version_ | 1866915309170982912 |
|---|---|
| author | Guo, Tianyu Zhu, Hanlin Zhang, Ruiqi Jiao, Jiantao Mei, Song Jordan, Michael I. Russell, Stuart |
| author_facet | Guo, Tianyu Zhu, Hanlin Zhang, Ruiqi Jiao, Jiantao Mei, Song Jordan, Michael I. Russell, Stuart |
| contents | ``Socrates is human. All humans are mortal. Therefore, Socrates is mortal.'' This form of argument illustrates a typical pattern of two-hop reasoning. Formally, two-hop reasoning refers to the process of inferring a conclusion by making two logical steps, each connecting adjacent concepts, such that the final conclusion depends on the integration of both steps. It is one of the most fundamental components of human reasoning and plays a crucial role in both formal logic and everyday decision-making. Despite recent progress in large language models (LLMs), we surprisingly find that they can fail at solving simple two-hop reasoning problems when distractors are present. We observe on a synthetic dataset that pre-trained LLMs often resort to random guessing among all plausible conclusions. However, after few steps of fine-tuning, models achieve near-perfect accuracy and exhibit strong length generalization. To understand the underlying mechanisms, we train a 3-layer Transformer from scratch on a synthetic two-hop reasoning task and reverse-engineer its internal information flow. We observe a clear progression in the attention logits throughout training. This pictures a sharp phase transition from an initial stage of random guessing to the emergence of a structured sequential query mechanism, where the model first retrieves the preceding and the bridge concepts in the early layers and then uses them to infer the final answer. Finally, we show that these dynamics can be captured by a minimal three-parameter attention-only network. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2502_13913 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2025 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | How Do LLMs Perform Two-Hop Reasoning in Context? Guo, Tianyu Zhu, Hanlin Zhang, Ruiqi Jiao, Jiantao Mei, Song Jordan, Michael I. Russell, Stuart Computation and Language Artificial Intelligence ``Socrates is human. All humans are mortal. Therefore, Socrates is mortal.'' This form of argument illustrates a typical pattern of two-hop reasoning. Formally, two-hop reasoning refers to the process of inferring a conclusion by making two logical steps, each connecting adjacent concepts, such that the final conclusion depends on the integration of both steps. It is one of the most fundamental components of human reasoning and plays a crucial role in both formal logic and everyday decision-making. Despite recent progress in large language models (LLMs), we surprisingly find that they can fail at solving simple two-hop reasoning problems when distractors are present. We observe on a synthetic dataset that pre-trained LLMs often resort to random guessing among all plausible conclusions. However, after few steps of fine-tuning, models achieve near-perfect accuracy and exhibit strong length generalization. To understand the underlying mechanisms, we train a 3-layer Transformer from scratch on a synthetic two-hop reasoning task and reverse-engineer its internal information flow. We observe a clear progression in the attention logits throughout training. This pictures a sharp phase transition from an initial stage of random guessing to the emergence of a structured sequential query mechanism, where the model first retrieves the preceding and the bridge concepts in the early layers and then uses them to infer the final answer. Finally, we show that these dynamics can be captured by a minimal three-parameter attention-only network. |
| title | How Do LLMs Perform Two-Hop Reasoning in Context? |
| topic | Computation and Language Artificial Intelligence |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2502.13913 |