Despite demonstrating emergent reasoning abilities, Large Language Models (LLMS) often lose track of complex, multi-step reasoning.Existing studies show that providing guidance via decomposing the original question into multiple subproblems elicits more robustness in LLM reasoning -a decomposer generates the subproblems, and a solver solves each of these subproblems.However, these techniques fail to accommodate coordination between the decomposer and the solver modules (either in a single model or different specialized ones) -the decomposer does not keep track of the ability of the solver to follow the decomposed reasoning.In this paper, we propose LM 2 to address these challenges.LM 2 modularizes the decomposition, solution, and verification into three different language models.The decomposer module identifies the key concepts necessary to solve the problem and generates step-by-step subquestions according to the reasoning requirement.The solver model generates the solution to the subproblems that are then checked by the verifier module; depending upon the feedback from the verifier, the reasoning context is constructed using the subproblems and the solutions.These models are trained to coordinate using policy learning.Exhaustive experimentation suggests the superiority of LM 2 over existing methods on in-and out-domain reasoning problems, outperforming the best baselines by 8.1% on MATH, 7.71% on JEEBench, and 9.7% on MedQA problems (code available at https://github.com/ LCS2- IIITD/Language_Model_Multiplex).

Large Language Models (LLMs) prompted to generate chain-of-thought (CoT) exhibit impressive reasoning capabilities.Recent attempts at prompt decomposition toward solving complex, multi-step reasoning problems depend on the ability of the LLM to simultaneously decompose and solve the problem.A significant disadvantage is that foundational LLMs are typically not available for finetuning, making adaptation computationally prohibitive.We believe (and demonstrate) that problem decomposition and solution generation are distinct capabilites, better addressed in separate modules, than by one monolithic LLM.We introduce DaSLaM, which uses a decomposition generator to decompose complex problems into subproblems that require fewer reasoning steps.These subproblems are answered by a solver.We use a relatively small (13B parameters) LM as the decomposition generator, which we train using policy gradient optimization to interact with a solver LM (regarded as blackbox) and guide it through subproblems, thereby rendering our method solver-agnostic.Evaluation on multiple different reasoning datasets reveal that with our method, a 175 billion parameter LM (text-davinci-003) can produce competitive or even better performance, compared to its orders-of-magnitude larger successor, GPT-4.Additionally, we show that DaSLaM is not limited by the solver's capabilities as a function of scale; e.g., solver LMs with diverse sizes give significant performance improvement with our solver-agnostic decomposition technique.Exhaustive ablation studies evince the superiority of our modular finetuning technique over exorbitantly large decomposer LLMs, based on prompting alone.