Quiet-STaR: Language Models Can Teach Themselves to Think Before Speaking

When writing and talking, people sometimes pause to think. Although reasoning-focused works have often framed reasoning as a method of answering questions or completing agentic tasks, reasoning is implicit in almost all written text. For example, this applies to the steps not stated between the lines of a proof or to the theory of mind underlying a conversation. In the Self-Taught Reasoner (STaR, Zelikman et al. 2022), useful thinking is learned by inferring rationales from few-shot examples in question-answering and learning from those that lead to a correct answer. This is a highly constrained setting -- ideally, a language model could instead learn to infer unstated rationales in arbitrary text. We present Quiet-STaR, a generalization of STaR in which LMs learn to generate rationales at each token to explain future text, improving their predictions. We address key challenges, including 1) the computational cost of generating continuations, 2) the fact that the LM does not initially know how to generate or use internal thoughts, and 3) the need to predict beyond individual next tokens. To resolve these, we propose a tokenwise parallel sampling algorithm, using learnable tokens indicating a thought's start and end, and an extended teacher-forcing technique. Encouragingly, generated rationales disproportionately help model difficult-to-predict tokens and improve the LM's ability to directly answer difficult questions. In particular, after continued pretraining of an LM on a corpus of internet text with Quiet-STaR, we find zero-shot improvements on GSM8K (5.9%$\rightarrow$10.9%) and CommonsenseQA (36.3%$\rightarrow$47.2%) and observe a perplexity improvement of difficult tokens in natural text. Crucially, these improvements require no fine-tuning on these tasks. Quiet-STaR marks a step towards LMs that can learn to reason in a more general and scalable way.

Variational Program Inference

We introduce a framework for representing a variety of interesting problems as inference over the execution of probabilistic model programs. We represent a "solution" to such a problem as a guide program which runs alongside the model program and influences the model program's random choices, leading the model program to sample from a different distribution than from its priors. Ideally the guide program influences the model program to sample from the posteriors given the evidence. We show how the KL- divergence between the true posterior distribution and the distribution induced by the guided model program can be efficiently estimated (up to an additive constant) by sampling multiple executions of the guided model program. In addition, we show how to use the guide program as a proposal distribution in importance sampling to statistically prove lower bounds on the probability of the evidence and on the probability of a hypothesis and the evidence. We can use the quotient of these two bounds as an estimate of the conditional probability of the hypothesis given the evidence. We thus turn the inference problem into a heuristic search for better guide programs.