24 December 2024 in ACM Computing Surveys
Humans possess an extraordinary ability to create and utilize tools. With the advent of foundation models, artificial intelligence systems have the potential to be equally adept in tool use as humans. This paradigm, which is dubbed as tool learning with foundation models , combines the strengths of tools and foundation models to achieve enhanced accuracy, efficiency, and automation in problem-solving. This article presents a systematic investigation and comprehensive review of tool learning. We first introduce the background of tool learning, including its cognitive origins, the paradigm shift of foundation models, and the complementary roles of tools and models. Then we recapitulate existing tool learning research and formulate a general framework: starting from understanding the user instruction, models should learn to decompose a complex task into several subtasks, dynamically adjust their plan through reasoning, and effectively conquer each sub-task by selecting appropriate tools. We also discuss how to train models for improved tool-use capabilities and facilitate generalization in tool learning. Finally, we discuss several open problems that require further investigation, such as ensuring trustworthy tool use, enabling tool creation with foundation models, and addressing personalization challenges. Overall, we hope this article could inspire future research in integrating tools with foundation models.
11 April 2025 in Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence
The leaderboard of Large Language Models (LLMs) in mathematical tasks has been continuously updated. However, the majority of evaluations focus solely on the final results, neglecting the quality of the intermediate steps. This oversight can mask underlying problems, such as logical errors or unnecessary steps in the reasoning process. To measure reasoning beyond final-answer accuracy, we introduce ReasonEval, a new methodology for evaluating the quality of reasoning steps. ReasonEval employs validity and redundancy to characterize the reasoning quality, as well as accompanying LLMs to assess them automatically. We explore different design options for the LLM-based evaluators and empirically demonstrate that ReasonEval, when instantiated with base models possessing strong mathematical knowledge and trained with high-quality labeled data, consistently outperforms baseline methods in the meta-evaluation datasets. We also highlight the strong generalization capabilities of ReasonEval. By utilizing ReasonEval to evaluate LLMs specialized in math, we find that an increase in final-answer accuracy does not necessarily guarantee an improvement in the overall quality of the reasoning steps for challenging mathematical problems. Additionally, we observe that ReasonEval can play a significant role in data selection. We open-source the best-performing model, meta-evaluation script, and all evaluation results to facilitate future research.