Stop Anthropomorphizing Intermediate Tokens as Reasoning/Thinking Traces

Intermediate token generation (ITG), where a model produces output before the solution, has become a standard method to improve the performance of language models on reasoning tasks. These intermediate tokens have been called \say{reasoning traces} or even \say{thinking traces} -- implicitly anthropomorphizing the traces, and implying that these traces resemble steps a human might take when solving a challenging problem, and as such can provide an interpretable window into the operation of the model's thinking process to the end user. In this position paper, we present evidence that this anthropomorphization isn't a harmless metaphor, and instead is quite dangerous -- it confuses the nature of these models and how to use them effectively, and leads to questionable research. We call on the community to avoid such anthropomorphization of intermediate tokens.
270 points by nunodonato 63 days ago arxiv.org 222 comments

Summary

Language models often use intermediate token generation to enhance reasoning abilities, but referring to these outputs as “reasoning traces” misrepresents their function. The article critiques this anthropomorphism, highlighting the need for clearer understanding of how these models operate without attributing human-like reasoning processes.

Comments (222 of ) ⌛

Loading more comments... ⌛
Scroll down to load more comments
No comments available.
Type to search HN and engineering blog articles
Press Escape to close  |  ↑↓ to navigate  |  Enter to open