Sadegh Mahdavi

Sadegh Mahdavi, Kevin Swersky, Thomas Kipf et al.

In this paper, we study the OOD generalization of neural algorithmic reasoning tasks, where the goal is to learn an algorithm (e.g., sorting, breadth-first search, and depth-first search) from input-output pairs using deep neural networks. First, we argue that OOD generalization in this setting is significantly different than common OOD settings. For example, some phenomena in OOD generalization of image classifications such as \emph{accuracy on the line} are not observed here, and techniques such as data augmentation methods do not help as assumptions underlying many augmentation techniques are often violated. Second, we analyze the main challenges (e.g., input distribution shift, non-representative data generation, and uninformative validation metrics) of the current leading benchmark, i.e., CLRS \citep{deepmind2021clrs}, which contains 30 algorithmic reasoning tasks. We propose several solutions, including a simple-yet-effective fix to the input distribution shift and improved data generation. Finally, we propose an attention-based 2WL-graph neural network (GNN) processor which complements message-passing GNNs so their combination outperforms the state-of-the-art model by a 3% margin averaged over all algorithms. Our code is available at: \url{https://github.com/smahdavi4/clrs}.

Sadegh Mahdavi, Renjie Liao, Christos Thrampoulidis

Transformers have become the go-to architecture for language and vision tasks, yet their theoretical properties, especially memorization capacity, remain elusive. This paper investigates the memorization abilities of multi-head attention mechanisms, examining how many example sequences they can memorize, as a function of the number of heads and sequence length. Motivated by experimental findings on vision transformers, we introduce novel assumptions about the linear independence of input data, distinct from the commonly used general-position assumption. Under these assumptions, we demonstrate that an attention layer with $H$ heads, dimension $d$, and context size $n < d$, featuring $Θ(Hd^2)$ parameters, can memorize $Ω(Hn)$ examples. Our analysis sheds light on how different attention heads handle various example sequences, aided by the softmax operator's saturation property. We validate our findings through experiments on synthetic data.

Sadegh Mahdavi, Raquel Aoki, Keyi Tang et al.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown remarkable performance in various natural language tasks, but they often struggle with planning problems that require structured reasoning. To address this limitation, the conversion of planning problems into the Planning Domain Definition Language (PDDL) has been proposed as a potential solution, enabling the use of automated planners. However, generating accurate PDDL files typically demands human inputs or correction, which can be time-consuming and costly. In this paper, we propose a novel approach that leverages LLMs and environment feedback to automatically generate PDDL domain and problem description files without the need for human intervention. Our method introduces an iterative refinement process that generates multiple problem PDDL candidates and progressively refines the domain PDDL based on feedback obtained from interacting with the environment. To guide the refinement process, we develop an Exploration Walk (EW) metric, which provides rich feedback signals for LLMs to update the PDDL file. We evaluate our approach on $10$ PDDL environments. We achieve an average task solve rate of 66% compared to a 29% solve rate by GPT-4's intrinsic planning with chain-of-thought prompting. Our work enables the automated modeling of planning environments using LLMs and environment feedback, eliminating the need for human intervention in the PDDL translation process and paving the way for more reliable LLM agents in challenging problems. Our code is available at https://github.com/BorealisAI/llm-pddl-planning

Sadegh Mahdavi, Muchen Li, Kaiwen Liu et al.

Advances in Large Language Models (LLMs) have sparked interest in their ability to solve Olympiad-level math problems. However, the training and evaluation of these models are constrained by the limited size and quality of available datasets, as creating large-scale data for such advanced problems requires extensive effort from human experts. In addition, current benchmarks are prone to contamination, leading to unreliable evaluations. In this paper, we present an automated pipeline that leverages the rich resources of the Art of Problem Solving (AoPS) forum, which predominantly features Olympiad-level problems and community-driven solutions. Using open-source LLMs, we develop a method to extract question-answer pairs from the forum, resulting in AoPS-Instruct, a dataset of more than 600,000 high-quality QA pairs. Our experiments demonstrate that fine-tuning LLMs on AoPS-Instruct improves their reasoning abilities across various benchmarks. Moreover, we build an automatic pipeline that introduces LiveAoPSBench, an evolving evaluation set with timestamps, derived from the latest forum data, providing a contamination-resistant benchmark for assessing LLM performance. Notably, we observe a significant decline in LLM performance over time, suggesting their success on older examples may stem from pre-training exposure rather than true reasoning ability. Our work presents a scalable approach to creating and maintaining large-scale, high-quality datasets for advanced math reasoning, offering valuable insights into the capabilities and limitations of LLMs in this domain. Our benchmark and code is available at https://github.com/DSL-Lab/aops

Sadegh Mahdavi, Branislav Kisacanin, Shubham Toshniwal et al.

Large language models have achieved remarkable success on final-answer mathematical problems, largely due to the ease of applying reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards. However, the reasoning underlying these solutions is often flawed. Advancing to rigorous proof-based mathematics requires reliable proof verification capabilities. We begin by analyzing multiple evaluation setups and show that focusing on a single benchmark can lead to brittle or misleading conclusions. To address this, we evaluate both proof-based and final-answer reasoning to obtain a more reliable measure of model performance. We then scale two major generative verification methods (GenSelect and LLM-as-a-Judge) to millions of tokens and identify their combination as the most effective framework for solution verification and selection. We further show that the choice of prompt for LLM-as-a-Judge significantly affects the model's performance, but reinforcement learning can reduce this sensitivity. However, despite improving proof-level metrics, reinforcement learning does not enhance final-answer precision, indicating that current models often reward stylistic or procedural correctness rather than mathematical validity. Our results establish practical guidelines for designing and evaluating scalable proof-verification and selection systems.