The DOI matches its DataCite record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Large Language Model Guided Tree-of-Thought
Abstract
In this paper, we introduce the Tree-of-Thought (ToT) framework, a novel approach aimed at improving the problem-solving capabilities of auto-regressive large language models (LLMs). The ToT technique is inspired by the human mind's approach for solving complex reasoning tasks through trial and error. In this process, the human mind explores the solution space through a tree-like thought process, allowing for backtracking when necessary. To implement ToT as a software system, we augment an LLM with additional modules including a prompter agent, a checker module, a memory module, and a ToT controller. In order to solve a given problem, these modules engage in a multi-round conversation with the LLM. The memory module records the conversation and state history of the problem solving process, which allows the system to backtrack to the previous steps of the thought-process and explore other directions from there. To verify the effectiveness of the proposed technique, we implemented a ToT-based solver for the Sudoku Puzzle. Experimental results show that the ToT framework can significantly increase the success rate of Sudoku puzzle solving. Our implementation of the ToT-based Sudoku solver is available on GitHub: \url{https://github.com/jieyilong/tree-of-thought-puzzle-solver}.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Yao et al. [2023a] and Long [2023] proposed the Tree-of-Thoughts (ToT) framework to enhance prompting capabilities for complex tasks requiring exploration and look-ahead reasoning.”
From A Systematic Survey of Prompt Engineering in Large Language Models: Techniques and Applications (2024) · cites this paper as Long, 2023
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Mastering Chess and Shogi by Self-Play with a General Reinforcement Learning Algorithm
Silver, D., Hubert, T., Schrittwieser, J., Antonoglou, I., Lai, M., Guez, A., Lanctot, M., Sifre, L., Kumaran, D., Graepel, T., et al. (2017) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1712.01815 · Cited by 1,102 · cited 1×
“The self-play training method is a reinforcement learning technique which was popularized by the development of competitive game-playing agents such as AlphaGo and AlphaStar [34, 35, 36], where an AI agent learns to improve its own strategy by playing against itself.”
Method
Cited by
Autonomous chemical research with large language models
Boiko, D. A., MacKnight, R., Kline, B., & Gomes, G. (2023) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-023-06792-0 · Cited by 1,050
Graph of Thoughts: Solving Elaborate Problems with Large Language Models
Besta, M., Blach, N., Kubicek, A., Gerstenberger, R., Podstawski, M., Gianinazzi, L., Gajda, J., Lehmann, T., Niewiadomski, H., Nyczyk, P., et al. (2024) · Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1609/aaai.v38i16.29720 · Cited by 556
Generative AI Literacy: Twelve Defining Competencies
Annapureddy, R., Fornaroli, A., & Gatica-Perez, D. (2025) · Digital Government: Research and Practice · doi:10.1145/3685680 · Cited by 333
A Systematic Survey of Prompt Engineering in Large Language Models: Techniques and Applications
Sahoo, P., Singh, A. K., Saha, S., Jain, V., Mondal, S., & Chadha, A. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2402.07927 · Cited by 288
Artificial intelligence for literature reviews: opportunities and challenges
Bolaños, F., Salatino, A., Osborne, F., & Motta, E. (2024) · Artificial Intelligence Review · doi:10.1007/s10462-024-10902-3 · Cited by 246
MathChat: Converse to Tackle Challenging Math Problems with LLM Agents
Wu, Y., Jia, F., Zhang, S., Li, H., Zhu, E., Wang, Y., Lee, Y. T., Peng, R., Wu, Q., & Wang, C. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2306.01337 · Cited by 98
Buehler, M. J. (2024) · ACS Engineering Au · doi:10.1021/acsengineeringau.3c00058 · Cited by 82
LM vs LM: Detecting Factual Errors via Cross Examination
Cohen, R., Hamri, M., Geva, M., & Globerson, A. (2023) · Proceedings of the 2023 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing · doi:10.18653/v1/2023.emnlp-main.778 · Cited by 60
Large language model for medical images: a survey of taxonomy, systematic review, and future trends
Wang, P., Lu, W., Lu, C., Zhou, R., Li, M., & Qin, L. (2025) · Big Data Mining and Analytics · doi:10.26599/bdma.2024.9020090 · Cited by 21
Arithmetic Reasoning with LLM: Prolog Generation & Permutation
Yang, X., Chen, B., & Tam, Y.-C. (2024) · Proceedings of the 2024 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (Volume 2: Short Papers) · doi:10.18653/v1/2024.naacl-short.61 · Cited by 12
Dynamic Cheatsheet: Test-Time Learning with Adaptive Memory
Suzgun, M., Yuksekgonul, M., Bianchi, F., Jurafsky, D., & Zou, J. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2504.07952
Arithmetic Reasoning with LLM: Prolog Generation & Permutation
Yang, X., Chen, B., & Tam, Y.-C. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2405.17893
“Therefore, one trajectory of efforts has been made to leverage reasoning structures like trees (Yao et al., 2023; Long, 2023) and graphs (Besta et al., 2023; Zhang et al., 2023).”
BackgroundAlgorithm of Thoughts: Enhancing Exploration of Ideas in Large Language Models
Sel, B., Al-Tawaha, A., Khattar, V., Jia, R., & Jin, M. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2308.10379 · Cited by 15
Metadata
- Authors
- Long, J.
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2023
- arXiv
- 2305.08291
- References
- 1
- Type
- Preprint
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.