Arrow Research search

Author name cluster

Kyle Richardson 0001

Possible papers associated with this exact author name in Arrow. This page groups case-insensitive exact name matches and is not a full identity disambiguation profile.

3 papers
1 author row

Possible papers

3

ICML Conference 2025 Conference Paper

Understanding the Logic of Direct Preference Alignment through Logic

  • Kyle Richardson 0001
  • Vivek Srikumar
  • Ashish Sabharwal

Recent direct preference alignment algorithms (DPA), such as DPO, have shown great promise in aligning large language models to human preferences. While this has motivated the development of many new variants of the original DPO loss, understanding the differences between these recent proposals, as well as developing new DPA loss functions, remains difficult given the lack of a technical and conceptual framework for reasoning about the underlying semantics of these algorithms. In this paper, we attempt to remedy this by formalizing DPA losses in terms of discrete reasoning problems. Specifically, we ask: Given an existing DPA loss, can we systematically derive a symbolic program that characterizes its semantics? We propose a novel formalism for characterizing preference losses for single model and reference model based approaches, and identify symbolic forms for a number of commonly used DPA variants. Further, we show how this formal view of preference learning sheds new light on both the size and structure of the DPA loss landscape, making it possible to not only rigorously characterize the relationships between recent loss proposals but also to systematically explore the landscape and derive new loss functions from first principles. We hope our framework and findings will help provide useful guidance to those working on human AI alignment.

ICML Conference 2025 Conference Paper

ZebraLogic: On the Scaling Limits of LLMs for Logical Reasoning

  • Bill Yuchen Lin
  • Ronan LeBras
  • Kyle Richardson 0001
  • Ashish Sabharwal
  • Radha Poovendran
  • Peter Clark
  • Yejin Choi 0001

We investigate the logical reasoning capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) and their scalability across complex deductive tasks. Using ZebraLogic, a newly developed benchmark dataset of logic grid puzzles derived from constraint satisfaction problems (CSPs), we systematically evaluate LLM performance. ZebraLogic spans a broad range of search space complexities and incorporates diverse logical constraints, providing a controlled environment to assess reasoning abilities. Our results reveal a significant decline in accuracy as problem complexity increases—a phenomenon we term the “curse of complexity. ” Notably, this limitation persists even with scaling model size and inference-time computation, suggesting fundamental constraints in current LLM reasoning capabilities. Additionally, we explore strategies such as Best-of-N sampling, backtracking mechanisms, and self-verification prompts to enhance logical reasoning performance. Our findings provide critical insights into the scaling behavior of LLMs, highlight their limitations, and outline potential directions for advancing their reasoning capabilities.

ICLR Conference 2023 Conference Paper

Decomposed Prompting: A Modular Approach for Solving Complex Tasks

  • Tushar Khot
  • Harsh Trivedi
  • Matthew Finlayson
  • Yao Fu
  • Kyle Richardson 0001
  • Peter Clark
  • Ashish Sabharwal

Few-shot prompting is a surprisingly powerful way to use Large Language Models (LLMs) to solve various tasks. However, this approach struggles as the task complexity increases or when the individual reasoning steps of the task themselves are hard to learn, especially when embedded in more complex tasks. To address this, we propose Decomposed Prompting, a new approach to solve complex tasks by decomposing them (via prompting) into simpler sub-tasks that can be delegated to a library of prompting-based LLMs dedicated to these sub-tasks. This modular structure allows each prompt to be optimized for its specific sub-task, further decomposed if necessary, and even easily replaced with more effective prompts, trained models, or symbolic functions if desired. We show that the flexibility and modularity of Decomposed Prompting allows it to outperform prior work on few-shot prompting using GPT3. On symbolic reasoning tasks, we can further decompose sub-tasks that are hard for LLMs into even simpler solvable sub-tasks. When the complexity comes from the input length, we can recursively decompose the task into the same task but with smaller inputs. We also evaluate our approach on textual multi-step reasoning tasks: on long-context multi-hop QA task, we can more effectively teach the sub-tasks via our separate sub-tasks prompts; and on open-domain multi-hop QA, we can incorporate a symbolic information retrieval within our decomposition framework, leading to improved performance on both tasks. Datasets, Code and Prompts available at https://github.com/allenai/DecomP.

v2026.09.13