tree-of-thoughts VS tree-of-thought-llm

I checked the issues and found https://github.com/kyegomez/tree-of-thoughts/issues/78

Plug in and Play Implementation of Tree of Thoughts: Deliberate Problem Solving with Large Language Models that Elevates Model Reasoning by atleast 70% (https://github.com/kyegomez/tree-of-thoughts)

same deal with amplification research like Tree of Thoughts, AdaPlanner, and Ghost in the Minecraft. same deal with agentized LLMs like Auto-GPT emphasizing testing regimens. they want efficiency and explainability, not this "mine is bigger than yours" nonsense coming out of Microsoft, Google, or Meta (which isn't even the entire picture of the opensource ML research within those firms either). There's this idealized "neurosymbolic AI" where everyone just wants code to do a job, so there should only be so much probabilistic behavior to learn the jobs that aren't learned to begin with, but the fact remains that the actual researchers and engineers want something that is as deterministic as imperative language can be. perhaps we'll achieve functional depth, and instead of some outdated "paperclip maximizer", we summon Maxwell's demon via a "complete" Church-Turing thesis. in other words, while a "vastly superior being in intelligence" is a really bad time for anyone that has an intellect-based superiority complex, the rest of us are humble enough to utilize this information science to further explore the unknown.

This is Shunyu, author of Tree oF Thoughts (arxiv.org/abs/2305.10601).

The official code to replicate paper results is https://github.com/ysymyth/tree-of-thought-llm

Not https://github.com/kyegomez/tree-of-thoughts which according to many who told me, is not right/good implementation of ToT, and damages the reputation of ToT

I explained the situation here: https://twitter.com/ShunyuYao12/status/1663946702754021383

I'd appreciate your help by unstaring his and staring mine, as currently Github and Google searches go to his repo by default, and it has been very misleading for many users.

I hacked a dirty PR into this derivative repo, to run it with oobabooga API: https://github.com/kyegomez/tree-of-thoughts/pull/8

[2305.10601] Tree of Thoughts: Deliberate Problem Solving with Large Language Models (arxiv.org)

Language models are increasingly being deployed for general problem solving across a wide range of tasks, but are still confined to token-level, left-to-right decision-making processes during inference. This means they can fall short in tasks that require exploration, strategic lookahead, or where initial decisions play a pivotal role. To surmount these challenges, we introduce a new framework for language model inference, “Tree of Thoughts” (ToT), which generalizes over the popular “Chain of Thought” approach to prompting language models, and enables exploration over coherent units of text (“thoughts”) that serve as intermediate steps toward problem solving. ToT allows LMs to perform deliberate decision making by considering multiple different reasoning paths and self-evaluating choices to decide the next course of action, as well as looking ahead or backtracking when necessary to make global choices. Our experiments show that ToT significantly enhances language models’ problem-solving abilities on three novel tasks requiring non-trivial planning or search: Game of 24, Creative Writing, and Mini Crosswords. For instance, in Game of 24, while GPT-4 with chain-of-thought prompting only solved 4% of tasks, our method achieved a success rate of 74%. Code repo with all prompts: https://github.com/princeton-nlp/tree-of-thought-llm.

GPU utilization should be down when using this technique. I’m hoping this could allow for more efficient batch inference on GPUs. If you can predict 10 tokens for the price of 1 it should allow you to do tree of thought much more efficiently.

https://github.com/princeton-nlp/tree-of-thought-llm

For those familiar with Daniel Kahneman's Thinking Fast and Slow, the current LLMs (such as GPT-4 via ChatGPT) seem to resemble System 1 thinking (near-instantaneous, automatic, intuitive processes like next-word prediction). However, they lack System 2 thinking (slow, effortful, logical, planning, reasoning). What I learned today is that Google's Gemini (an LLM in training now) not only has more modalities (I think all Youtube Video and audio??), more compute, and almost twice the training data, but they're building in AlphaGo-type learning, which resembles tree of thoughts and looks a LOT like the missing puzzle piece of System 2 thinking. Will it be AGI? Maybe, and it's coming this winter.

Tree of thoughts: https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.10601

Good video on "Tree of thoughts" which also reviews / puts it in the context of other methods: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ut5kp56wW_4

Completion vs conversational interface is something you can read about in the OpenAI API documentation.

For the remaining things I don't have single specific pointer at hand.

What do you think about the combination of Tree of Thoughts: Deliberate Problem Solving with Large Language Models LongNet: Scaling Transformers to 1,000,000,000 Tokens Textbooks Are All You Need Attention Is All You Need Train Short, Test Long: Attention with Linear Biases Enables Input Length Extrapolation

You are right. Tree of Thoughts: Deliberate Problem Solving with Large Language Models proposes to solve this via MCTS-style generation (similar to how AlphaGo worked, and a lot of planning & control problems are executed).

The transformer was developed in 2017 and it powers all modern LLMs. If you're familiar with Daniel Kahneman's work from Thinking Fast and Slow, you could easily summarize LLMs as excellent System 1 thinking: our fast, automatic, unconscious responses (e.g. autocomplete). I'd argue that we're one development (similar to the transformer) away from creating System 2 thinking: deliberate and strategic thinking. In fact, with merely GPT-4 and some clever architectures, researchers have developed chain-of-thought prompting and, more recently, tree-of-thoughts reasoning. While external to the LLM architecture, embedding these concepts into a LLM could very likely solve the creation of System 2 thinking and produce the first real AGI. Adding more modalities (e.g. audio, images, video, topography, etc.) will simply add more nuance in the weights and biases of a complete system.

There are a bunch of other methods to improve quality and performance like tree-of-thought-llm, connecting a LLM to a database or have it review its own output.