Cassandra A. Cohen

CL
h-index5
4papers
13citations
Novelty49%
AI Score45

4 Papers

LGMay 29
Learning to Construct Practical Agentic Systems

Aditya Kumar, Zhihan Lei, Jerry Yan et al.

Automated design and optimization of agentic LLM-based systems leads to sophisticated systems that substantially improve result quality over off-the-shelf agentic patterns. However, studies of fielded agentic systems show that production systems focus much more on issues such as simplicity, controllability, and predictability of inference costs. In this paper we propose principled approaches to designing and optimizing practical agentic systems. We describe an agent framework that enables designers to enforce modularity in agentic systems, by defining "pseudo-tools" that call LLMs recursively on a restricted context. Using this framework we hand-engineer agents for a diverse set of tasks, and show that relative to dynamically-planned workflows, hand-constructed fixed workflows are generally cheaper and more accurate. We then propose novel learning methods for the agentic components required by this framework, namely pseudo-tools and fixed workflows. These learning methods generally outperform hand-engineered agents. We also exploit the modularity of the framework to apply multi-objective optimization methods to jointly optimize cost and response quality and blend the results of multiple learning systems.

CLSep 17, 2024
Watch Your Steps: Observable and Modular Chains of Thought

Cassandra A. Cohen, William W. Cohen

We propose a variant of chain of thought (CoT) prompting called Program Trace Prompting that makes explanations more observable while preserving the power, generality and flexibility of CoT. In our approach, few-shot CoT demonstrations are wrapped in a formal syntax based on Python, and each prompt: identifies and names steps; defines the input/output behavior of steps; and replaces CoT explanations of in-context examples with chains of these formalized steps on the same examples. Program Trace Prompting is applicable to many tasks, achieving strong results on the 23 diverse tasks in the BIG-Bench Hard benchmark. More importantly, by instrumenting explanations in this way, we enable new types of analysis. In particular, we identify "non-local errors" (which correspond to incorrectly learning the reasoning method illustrated in the demonstrations) as an unaddressed issue in CoT learning, and we present methods for verifying the modularity of steps in a CoT explanation.

CLFeb 21, 2025Code
Understand User Opinions of Large Language Models via LLM-Powered In-the-Moment User Experience Interviews

Mengqiao Liu, Tevin Wang, Cassandra A. Cohen et al.

Which large language model (LLM) is better? Every evaluation tells a story, but what do users really think about current LLMs? This paper presents CLUE, an LLM-powered interviewer that conducts in-the-moment user experience interviews, right after users interact with LLMs, and automatically gathers insights about user opinions from massive interview logs. We conduct a study with thousands of users to understand user opinions on mainstream LLMs, recruiting users to first chat with a target LLM and then be interviewed by CLUE. Our experiments demonstrate that CLUE captures interesting user opinions, e.g., the bipolar views on the displayed reasoning process of DeepSeek-R1 and demands for information freshness and multi-modality. Our code and data are at https://github.com/cxcscmu/LLM-Interviewer.

CLMay 30, 2025
Semi-structured LLM Reasoners Can Be Rigorously Audited

Jixuan Leng, Cassandra A. Cohen, Zhixian Zhang et al. · cmu

Although Large Language Models (LLMs) have become capable reasoners, the problem of faithfulness persists: their reasoning can contain errors and omissions that are difficult to detect and that may obscure biases in model outputs. To address this issue, we introduce Semi-Structured Reasoning Models (SSRMs), which are trained to produce semi-structured representations of reasoning. SSRMs generate reasoning traces in a non-executable Pythonic syntax that names each reasoning step and marks its inputs and outputs. This structure allows SSRM traces to be automatically audited to identify reasoning flaws. We evaluate three types of audits: hand-crafted structured reasoning audits, written in a domain-specific language (DSL) implemented in Python; LLM-generated structured reasoning audits; and learned typicality audits, which apply probabilistic models over reasoning traces. We show that all of these methods can be used to effectively flag probable reasoning errors. Importantly, the auditability of SSRMs does not appear to compromise overall accuracy: in evaluation on twelve benchmarks and two model families, SSRMs demonstrate strong performance and generalizability relative to other models of comparable size.