File size: 7,149 Bytes
e706de2 |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 |
# Concept: Atom of Thought (AoT) Pattern for AI Agents
## The Core Idea
**Atom of Thought = "SQL for Reasoning"**
Just as SQL breaks complex data operations into atomic, composable statements, AoT breaks reasoning into minimal, executable steps.
## What is an Atom?
An atom is the **smallest unit of reasoning** that:
1. Expresses exactly **one** idea
2. Can be **validated independently**
3. Can be **executed deterministically**
4. **Cannot hide** a mistake
### Examples
β **Not atomic** (compound statement):
```
"Search for rooms in Graz and filter by capacity"
```
β
**Atomic** (separate steps):
```
1. Search for rooms in Graz
2. Filter rooms by minimum capacity of 30
```
## The Three Layers
```
βββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββ
β LLM (Planning Layer) β
β - Proposes atomic plan β
β - Does NOT execute β
βββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββ
β
βββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββ
β Validator (Safety Layer) β
β - Checks plan structure β
β - Validates dependencies β
βββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββ
β
βββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββ
β Executor (Execution Layer) β
β - Runs atoms deterministicallyβ
β - Manages state β
βββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββ
```
## Why Separation Matters
### Traditional LLM Approach (ReAct)
```
LLM thinks β LLM acts β LLM thinks β LLM acts
```
**Problem:** Execution logic lives inside the model (black box)
### Atom of Thought Approach
```
LLM plans β System validates β System executes
```
**Benefit:** Execution logic lives in code (white box)
## Mental Model
Think of AoT as the difference between:
| Cooking | Programming |
|---------|------------|
| **Recipe** (AoT plan) | **Algorithm** |
| "Boil water" | `boilWater()` |
| "Add pasta" | `addPasta()` |
| "Cook 8 minutes" | `cook(8)` |
vs.
| Improvising | Natural Language |
|-------------|------------------|
| "Make dinner" | "Figure it out" |
| (figure it out) | (hallucinate) |
## The Atom Structure
```javascript
{
"id": 2,
"kind": "tool", // tool | decision | final
"name": "multiply", // operation name
"input": { // explicit inputs
"a": "<result_of_1>", // reference to previous result
"b": 3
},
"dependsOn": [1] // must wait for atom 1
}
```
**Why this structure?**
- `id`: Establishes order
- `kind`: Categorizes operation type
- `name`: References executable function
- `input`: Makes data flow explicit
- `dependsOn`: Declares dependencies
## Dependency Graph
Atoms form a **directed acyclic graph (DAG)**:
```
βββββββ
β 1 β add(15, 7)
ββββ¬βββ
β
ββββΌβββ
β 2 β multiply(result_1, 3)
ββββ¬βββ
β
ββββΌβββ
β 3 β subtract(result_2, 10)
ββββ¬βββ
β
ββββΌβββ
β 4 β final
βββββββ
```
**Properties:**
- Can be executed in topological order
- Can parallelize independent branches
- Failures stop at failed node
- Easy to visualize and debug
## State Management
```javascript
const state = {};
// After atom 1
state[1] = 22; // result of add(15, 7)
// After atom 2
state[2] = 66; // result of multiply(22, 3)
// After atom 3
state[3] = 56; // result of subtract(66, 10)
```
**State is:**
- Explicit (key-value map)
- Immutable per atom (no overwrites)
- Traceable (full history)
- Inspectable (debugging)
## Comparison: AoT vs ReAct
### Question: "What is (15 + 7) Γ 3 - 10?"
#### ReAct Output (text):
```
Thought: I need to add 15 and 7 first
Action: add(15, 7)
Observation: 22
Thought: Now multiply by 3
Action: multiply(22, 3)
Observation: 66
Thought: Finally subtract 10
Action: subtract(66, 10)
Observation: 56
Answer: 56
```
#### AoT Output (JSON):
```json
{
"atoms": [
{"id": 1, "kind": "tool", "name": "add", "input": {"a": 15, "b": 7}},
{"id": 2, "kind": "tool", "name": "multiply", "input": {"a": "<result_of_1>", "b": 3}, "dependsOn": [1]},
{"id": 3, "kind": "tool", "name": "subtract", "input": {"a": "<result_of_2>", "b": 10}, "dependsOn": [2]},
{"id": 4, "kind": "final", "name": "report", "dependsOn": [3]}
]
}
```
### Key Differences
| Aspect | ReAct | AoT |
|--------|-------|-----|
| **Format** | Natural language | Structured data |
| **Validation** | Impossible | Before execution |
| **Testing** | Mock entire LLM | Test executor independently |
| **Debugging** | Read through text | Inspect atom N |
| **Replay** | Re-run entire conversation | Re-run from any atom |
| **Audit trail** | Conversational history | Data structure |
## When AoT Shines
### β
Perfect for:
- **Multi-step workflows** (booking, pipelines)
- **API orchestration** (call A, then B with A's result)
- **Financial transactions** (auditable, reversible)
- **Compliance-sensitive systems** (every step logged)
- **Production agents** (failures must be clean)
### β Not ideal for:
- **Creative writing**
- **Open-ended exploration**
- **Brainstorming**
- **Single-step queries**
## Real-World Analogy
**ReAct is like a chef improvising:**
- Flexible
- Creative
- Hard to replicate exactly
- Mistakes hidden in process
**AoT is like following a recipe:**
- Repeatable
- Testable
- Step X failed? Start from step X-1
- Every ingredient and action is explicit
## The Hidden Benefit: Debuggability
When something goes wrong:
**ReAct:**
```
"The model said something weird in iteration 7"
β Re-read entire conversation
β Guess where it went wrong
β Hope it doesn't happen again
```
**AoT:**
```
"Atom 3 failed with 'Division by zero'"
β Look at atom 3's inputs
β Check where those inputs came from (atom 1, 2)
β Fix tool or add validation
β Re-run from atom 3
```
## Implementation Checklist
β
**LLM side:**
- [ ] System prompt enforces JSON output
- [ ] Grammar constrains to valid schema
- [ ] Atoms are minimal (one operation each)
- [ ] Dependencies are explicit
β
**System side:**
- [ ] Validator checks tool names
- [ ] Validator checks dependencies
- [ ] Executor resolves references
- [ ] Executor is deterministic
- [ ] State is immutable
## The Bottom Line
**ReAct asks:**
"What would an intelligent agent say next?"
**AoT asks:**
"What is the minimal, executable plan?"
For production systems, you want the second question.
|