mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

In-Context Ability Transfer for Question Decomposition in Complex QA

arXiv 2310.18371 ↗First posted 26 Oct 2023cs.CL cs.AIcited by 3

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Answering complex questions is a challenging task that requires question decomposition and multistep reasoning for arriving at the solution. While existing supervised and unsupervised approaches are specialized to a certain task and involve training, recently proposed prompt-based approaches offer generalizable solutions to tackle a wide variety of complex question-answering (QA) tasks. However, existing prompt-based approaches that are effective for complex QA tasks involve expensive hand annotations from experts in the form of rationales and are not generalizable to newer complex QA scenarios and tasks. We propose, icat (In-Context Ability Transfer) which induces reasoning capabilities in LLMs without any LLM fine-tuning or manual annotation of in-context samples. We transfer the ability to decompose complex questions to simpler questions or generate step-by-step rationales to LLMs, by careful selection from available data sources of related tasks. We also propose an automated uncertainty-aware exemplar selection approach for selecting examples from transfer data sources. Finally, we conduct large-scale experiments on a variety of complex QA tasks involving numerical reasoning, compositional complex QA, and heterogeneous complex QA which require decomposed reasoning. We show that ICAT convincingly outperforms existing prompt-based solutions without involving any model training, showcasing the benefits of re-using existing abilities.

Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 27 of its 58 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 26 Oct 2023.

Builds on

27 of 58 references.

References · 27

  1. 2021Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problemscited by 10,109
  2. 2021What Makes Good In-Context Examples for GPT-3?cited by 1,195
  3. 2021Fantastically Ordered Prompts and Where to Find Them: Overcoming Few-Shot Prompt Order Sensitivitycited by 1,135
  4. 2022Measuring and Narrowing the Compositionality Gap in Language Modelscited by 1,075
  5. 2021MuSiQue: Multihop Questions via Single-hop Question Compositioncited by 916
  6. 2021Are NLP Models really able to Solve Simple Math Word Problems?cited by 878
  7. 2021Did Aristotle Use a Laptop? A Question Answering Benchmark with Implicit Reasoning Strategiescited by 743
  8. 2019MathQA: Towards Interpretable Math Word Problem Solving with Operation-Based Formalismscited by 662
  9. 2021Learning To Retrieve Prompts for In-Context Learningcited by 648
  10. 2021FinQA: A Dataset of Numerical Reasoning over Financial Datacited by 562
  11. 2022Complexity-Based Prompting for Multi-Step Reasoningcited by 388
  12. 2016Solving General Arithmetic Word Problemscited by 360
15 more
  1. 2022Dynamic Prompt Learning via Policy Gradient for Semi-structured Mathematical Reasoningcited by 350
  2. 2019Optimal transport mapping via input convex neural networkscited by 206
  3. 2023Large Language Models are Versatile Decomposers: Decompose Evidence and Questions for Table-based Reasoningcited by 178
  4. 2022The Unreliability of Explanations in Few-shot Prompting for Textual Reasoningcited by 169
  5. 2020Injecting Numerical Reasoning Skills into Language Modelscited by 133
  6. 2019Multi-hop Reading Comprehension through Question Decomposition and Rescoringcited by 119
  7. 2020Unsupervised Question Decomposition for Question Answeringcited by 118
  8. 2020Text Modular Networks: Learning to Decompose Tasks in the Language of Existing Modelscited by 65
  9. 2020Knowledge-Aware Language Model Pretrainingcited by 52
  10. 2018Semantically-Aligned Equation Generation for Solving and Reasoning Math Word Problemscited by 49
  11. 2022Is a Question Decomposition Unit All We Need?cited by 37
  12. 2019Training language GANs from Scratchcited by 31
  13. 2020Do Multi-Hop Question Answering Systems Know How to Answer the Single-Hop Sub-Questions?cited by 30
  14. 2018On Accurate Evaluation of GANs for Language Generationcited by 20
  15. 2022Despite "super-human" performance, current LLMs are unsuited for decisions about ethics and safetycited by 13

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2024: 2; 2025: 1.

3 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2022Successive Prompting for Decomposing Complex Questions
  2. 2025One More Question is Enough, Expert Question Decomposition (EQD) Model for Domain Quantitative Reasoning
  3. 2026Inferential Question Answering
  4. 2023Large Language Models are Complex Table Parsers
  5. 2026ReasonLab: A Controlled and Auditable Evaluation of Prompting Techniques for Multiple-Choice QA
  6. 2023Getting MoRE out of Mixture of Language Model Reasoning Experts
  7. 2024DEXTER: A Benchmark for open-domain Complex Question Answering using LLMs
  8. 2025T2: An Adaptive Test-Time Scaling Strategy for Contextual Question Answering