Archives/Prompt-Engineering-Guide
2
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/dair-ai/Prompt-Engineering-Guide synced 2024-11-02 15:40:13 +00:00
Code Issues Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Merge pull request #198 from dave1010/patch-1

Browse Source 
Add Tree-of-Thought Prompting
This commit is contained in:
Elvis Saravia 2023-06-19 09:39:11 -06:00 committed by GitHub
commit 54c9025a5e
No known key found for this signature in database
GPG Key ID: 4AEE18F83AFDEB23
1 changed files with 10 additions and 0 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

10
pages/techniques/tot.en.mdx
View File

@ -31,3 +31,13 @@ Code available [here](https://github.com/princeton-nlp/tree-of-thought-llm) and
At a high level, the main ideas of [Yao et el. (2023)](https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.10601) and [Long (2023)](https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.08291) are similar. Both enhance LLM's capability for complex problem solving through tree search via a multi-round conversation. One of the main difference is that [Yao et el. (2023)](https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.10601) leverages DFS/BFS/beam search, while the tree search strategy (i.e. when to backtrack and backtracking by how many levels, etc.) proposed in [Long (2023)](https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.08291) is driven by a "ToT Controller" trained through reinforcement learning. DFS/BFS/Beam search are generic solution search strategies with no adaptation to specific problems. In comparison, a ToT Controller trained through RL might be able learn from new data set or through self-play (AlphaGo vs brute force search), and hence the RL-based ToT system can continue to evolve and learn new knowledge even with a fixed LLM. At a high level, the main ideas of [Yao et el. (2023)](https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.10601) and [Long (2023)](https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.08291) are similar. Both enhance LLM's capability for complex problem solving through tree search via a multi-round conversation. One of the main difference is that [Yao et el. (2023)](https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.10601) leverages DFS/BFS/beam search, while the tree search strategy (i.e. when to backtrack and backtracking by how many levels, etc.) proposed in [Long (2023)](https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.08291) is driven by a "ToT Controller" trained through reinforcement learning. DFS/BFS/Beam search are generic solution search strategies with no adaptation to specific problems. In comparison, a ToT Controller trained through RL might be able learn from new data set or through self-play (AlphaGo vs brute force search), and hence the RL-based ToT system can continue to evolve and learn new knowledge even with a fixed LLM.
[Hulbert (2023)](https://github.com/dave1010/tree-of-thought-prompting) has proposed Tree-of-Thought Prompting, which applies the main concept from ToT frameworks as a simple prompting technique, getting the LLM to evaluate intermediate thoughts in a single prompt. A sample ToT prompt is:
```
Imagine three different experts are answering this question.
All experts will write down 1 step of their thinking,
then share it with the group.
Then all experts will go on to the next step, etc.
If any expert realises they're wrong at any point then they leave.
The question is...
```