Author name cluster

Najoung Kim

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.

6 papers

2 author rows

ICLR Conference 2025 Conference Paper

Transformers Struggle to Learn to Search

Abulhair Saparov
Srushti Ajay Pawar
Shreyas Pimpalgaonkar
Nitish Joshi
Richard Yuanzhe Pang
Vishakh Padmakumar
Mehran Kazemi
Najoung Kim

Search is an ability foundational in many important tasks, and recent studies have shown that large language models (LLMs) struggle to perform search robustly. It is unknown whether this inability is due to a lack of data, insufficient model parameters, or fundamental limitations of the transformer architecture. In this work, we use the foundational graph connectivity problem as a testbed to generate effectively limitless high-coverage data to train small transformers and test whether they can learn to perform search. We find that, when given the right training distribution, the transformer is able to learn to search. We analyze the algorithm that the transformer has learned through a novel mechanistic interpretability technique that enables us to extract the computation graph from the trained model. We find that for each vertex in the input graph, transformers compute the set of vertices reachable from that vertex. Each layer then progressively expands these sets, allowing the model to search over a number of vertices exponential in the number of layers. However, we find that as the input graph size increases, the transformer has greater difficulty in learning the task. This difficulty is not resolved even as the number of parameters is increased, suggesting that increasing model scale will not lead to robust search abilities. We also find that performing search in-context (i.e., chain-of-thought) does not resolve this inability to learn to search on larger graphs.

Details

NeurIPS Conference 2025 Conference Paper

Vision-and-Language Training Helps Deploy Taxonomic Knowledge but Does Not Fundamentally Alter It

Yulu Qin
Dheeraj Varghese
Adam Dahlgren Lindström
Lucia Donatelli
Kanishka Misra
Najoung Kim

Does vision-and-language (VL) training change the linguistic representations of language models in meaningful ways? In terms of downstream task performance on text-only tasks, most results in the literature have shown marginal differences. In this work, we start from the hypothesis that the domain in which VL training could have a significant effect is lexical-conceptual knowledge, in particular its taxonomic organization. Through comparing minimal pairs of text-only LMs and their VL-trained counterparts, we first show that the VL models often outperform their text-only counterparts on a text-only question-answering task that requires taxonomic understanding of concepts mentioned in the questions. Using an array of targeted behavioral and representational analyses, we show that the LMs and VLMs do not differ significantly in terms of their taxonomic knowledge itself, but they differ in how they represent questions that contain concepts in a taxonomic relation vs. a non-taxonomic relation. This implies that the taxonomic knowledge itself does not change substantially through additional VL training, but VL training does improve the deployment of this knowledge in the context of a specific task, even when the presentation of the task is purely linguistic.

PDF Details

NeurIPS Conference 2023 Conference Paper

BoardgameQA: A Dataset for Natural Language Reasoning with Contradictory Information

Mehran Kazemi
Quan Yuan
Deepti Bhatia
Najoung Kim
Xin Xu
Vaiva Imbrasaite
Deepak Ramachandran

Automated reasoning with unstructured natural text is a key requirement for many potential applications of NLP and for developing robust AI systems. Recently, Language Models (LMs) have demonstrated complex reasoning capacities even without any finetuning. However, existing evaluation for automated reasoning assumes access to a consistent and coherent set of information over which models reason. When reasoning in the real-world, the available information is frequently inconsistent or contradictory, and therefore models need to be equipped with a strategy to resolve such conflicts when they arise. One widely-applicable way of resolving conflicts is to impose preferences over information sources (e. g. , based on source credibility or information recency) and adopt the source with higher preference. In this paper, we formulate the problem of reasoning with contradictory information guided by preferences over sources as the classical problem of defeasible reasoning, and develop a dataset called BoardgameQA for measuring the reasoning capacity of LMs in this setting. BoardgameQA also incorporates reasoning with implicit background knowledge, to better reflect reasoning problems in downstream applications. We benchmark various LMs on BoardgameQA and the results reveal a significant gap in the reasoning capacity of state-of-the-art LMs on this problem, showing that reasoning with conflicting information does not surface out-of-the-box in LMs. While performance can be improved with finetuning, it nevertheless remains poor.

PDF Details

TMLR Journal 2023 Journal Article

Inverse Scaling: When Bigger Isn't Better

Ian R. McKenzie
Alexander Lyzhov
Michael Martin Pieler
Alicia Parrish
Aaron Mueller
Ameya Prabhu
Euan McLean
Xudong Shen

Work on scaling laws has found that large language models (LMs) show predictable improvements to overall loss with increased scale (model size, training data, and compute). Here, we present evidence for the claim that LMs may show inverse scaling, or worse task performance with increased scale, e.g., due to flaws in the training objective and data. We present empirical evidence of inverse scaling on 11 datasets collected by running a public contest, the Inverse Scaling Prize, with a substantial prize pool. Through analysis of the datasets, along with other examples found in the literature, we identify four potential causes of inverse scaling: (i) preference to repeat memorized sequences over following in-context instructions, (ii) imitation of undesirable patterns in the training data, (iii) tasks containing an easy distractor task which LMs could focus on, rather than the harder real task, and (iv) correct but misleading few-shot demonstrations of the task. We release the winning datasets at inversescaling.com/data to allow for further investigation of inverse scaling. Our tasks have helped drive the discovery of U-shaped and inverted-U scaling trends, where an initial trend reverses, suggesting that scaling trends are less reliable at predicting the behavior of larger-scale models than previously understood. Overall, our results suggest that there are tasks for which increased model scale alone may not lead to progress, and that more careful thought needs to go into the data and objectives for training language models.

PDF Details

NeurIPS Conference 2023 Conference Paper

Testing the General Deductive Reasoning Capacity of Large Language Models Using OOD Examples

Abulhair Saparov
Richard Yuanzhe Pang
Vishakh Padmakumar
Nitish Joshi
Mehran Kazemi
Najoung Kim
He He

Given the intractably large size of the space of proofs, any model that is capable of general deductive reasoning must generalize to proofs of greater complexity. Recent studies have shown that large language models (LLMs) possess some abstract deductive reasoning ability given chain-of-thought prompts. However, they have primarily been tested on proofs using modus ponens or of a specific size, and from the same distribution as the in-context examples. To measure the general deductive reasoning ability of LLMs, we test on a broad set of deduction rules and measure their ability to generalize to more complex proofs from simpler demonstrations from multiple angles: depth-, width-, and compositional generalization. To facilitate systematic exploration, we construct a new synthetic and programmable reasoning dataset that enables control over deduction rules and proof complexity. Our experiments on four LLMs of various sizes and training objectives show that they are able to generalize to compositional proofs. However, they have difficulty generalizing to longer proofs, and they require explicit demonstrations to produce hypothetical subproofs, specifically in proof by cases and proof by contradiction.

PDF Details

AAAI Conference 2019 Conference Paper

Predicting the Argumenthood of English Prepositional Phrases

Najoung Kim
Kyle Rawlins
Benjamin Van Durme
Paul Smolensky

Distinguishing between arguments and adjuncts of a verb is a longstanding, nontrivial problem. In natural language processing, argumenthood information is important in tasks such as semantic role labeling (SRL) and prepositional phrase (PP) attachment disambiguation. In theoretical linguistics, many diagnostic tests for argumenthood exist but they often yield conflicting and potentially gradient results. This is especially the case for syntactically oblique items such as PPs. We propose two PP argumenthood prediction tasks branching from these two motivations: (1) binary argumentadjunct classification of PPs in VerbNet, and (2) gradient argumenthood prediction using human judgments as gold standard, and report results from prediction models that use pretrained word embeddings and other linguistically informed features. Our best results on each task are (1) acc. = 0. 955, F1 = 0. 954 (ELMo+BiLSTM) and (2) Pearson’s r = 0. 624 (word2vec+MLP). Furthermore, we demonstrate the utility of argumenthood prediction in improving sentence representations via performance gains on SRL when a sentence encoder is pretrained with our tasks.

PDF Details