Reasoning with Language Model is Planning with World Model
Open accessAbstract
Large language models (LLMs) have shown remarkable reasoning capabilities, especially when prompted to generate intermediate reasoning steps (e.g., Chain-of-Thought, CoT). However, LLMs can still struggle with problems that are easy for humans, such as generating action plans for executing tasks in a given environment, or performing complex math, logical, and commonsense reasoning. The deficiency stems from the key fact that LLMs lack an internal $\textit{world model}$ to predict the world $\textit{state}$ (e.g., environment status, intermediate variable values) and simulate long-term outcomes of actions. This prevents LLMs from performing deliberate planning akin to human brains, which involves exploring alternative reasoning paths, anticipating future states and rewards, and iteratively refining existing reasoning steps. To overcome the limitations, we propose a new LLM reasoning framework, $\underline{R}$easoning vi$\underline{a}$ $\underline{P}$lanning $\textbf{(RAP)}$. RAP repurposes the LLM as both a world model and a reasoning agent, and incorporates a principled planning algorithm (based on Monto Carlo Tree Search) for strategic exploration in the vast reasoning space. During reasoning, the LLM (as agent) incrementally builds a reasoning tree under the guidance of the LLM (as world model) and task-specific rewards, and obtains a high-reward reasoning path efficiently with a proper balance between exploration $\textit{vs.}$ exploitation. We apply RAP to a variety of challenging reasoning problems including plan generation, math reasoning, and logical inference. Empirical results on these tasks demonstrate the superiority of RAP over various strong baselines, including CoT and least-to-most prompting with self-consistency. RAP on LLAMA-33B surpasses CoT on GPT-4 with 33% relative improvement in a plan generation setting.
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
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?
This advanced reasoning mechanism surpasses traditional CoT, even though the model is not explicitly trained or instructed to operate in this manner.
“This advanced reasoning mechanism surpasses traditional CoT, even though the model is not explicitly trained or instructed to operate in this manner”
From Training Large Language Models to Reason in a Continuous Latent Space (2024) · cites this paper as Hao et al., 2023
The Results in §4.3 and the Conclusion report that RAP outperforms CoT on the evaluated reasoning tasks. But §3 and §3.1 say RAP repurposes the model through prompting, including a prompt that guides it to generate world states. The claim that the model is not explicitly instructed to operate this way is therefore not supported. (LLM, conf=0.87)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredMore recent agents additionally use LLMs to reason, plan, and manage long-term memory to improve decision-making.
“While the earliest agents used LLMs to directly select or generate actions (Figure 1B; Ahn et al., 2022; Huang et al., 2022b), more recent agents additionally use them to reason (Yao et al., 2022b), plan (Hao et al., 2023; Yao et al., 2023), and manage long-term memory (Park et al., 2023; Wang et al., 2023a) to improve decision-making.”
From Cognitive Architectures for Language Agents (2023) · cites this paper as Hao et al., 2023
Initial works have implemented classical planning and tree search using toy tasks such as game of 24 or block building.
“Initial works have implemented classical planning and tree search (Yao et al., 2023; Hao et al., 2023; Liu et al., 2023a; Dagan et al., 2023), using toy tasks such as game of 24 or block building.”
From Cognitive Architectures for Language Agents (2023) · cites this paper as Hao et al., 2023
LLMs can be used for designing a reward model or shaping the reward.
“LLMs can also be used for designing a reward model or shaping the reward”
From LLMs Can't Plan, But Can Help Planning in LLM-Modulo Frameworks (2024) · cites this paper as Hao et al., 2023
CoT's autoregressive generation nature makes it challenging to mimic human reasoning on more complex problems that typically require planning and search.
“While CoT has proven effective for certain tasks, its autoregressive generation nature makes it challenging to mimic human reasoning on more complex problems (LeCun, 2022;Hao et al., 2023), which typically require planning and search.”
From Training Large Language Models to Reason in a Continuous Latent Space (2024) · cites this paper as Hao et al., 2023
Equipping LLM agents with LLM-centric functional modules including planning, reasoning, tool use and memory greatly enhances their capabilities.
“LLM agents with several LLM-centric functional modules including planning (Hao et al., 2023;Zeng et al., 2024;Shao et al., 2025), reasoning (Wei et al., 2022;Yao et al., 2024;Shang et al., 2024;Xu et al., 2025), using tools (Shen et al., 2024;Schick et al., 2024), and monitoring memory (Wang et al., 2024a;Park et al., 2023), greatly enhancing the capabilities of LLM agents.”
From AgentSquare: Automatic LLM Agent Search in Modular Design Space (2024) · cites this paper as Hao et al., 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.
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 54
- Alan Baddeley. 1992. Working memory. Science, 255(5044):556-559.
- Robert Eamon Briscoe. 2011. Mental imagery and the varieties of amodal perception. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, 92(2):153-173.
- Tom Brown, Benjamin Mann, Nick Ryder, Melanie Subbiah, Jared D Kaplan, Prafulla Dhariwal, Arvind Neelakantan, Pranav Shyam, Girish Sastry, Amanda Askell, et al. 2020. Language models are few-shot learners. Advances in neural information processing systems, 33:1877-1901.
- Sébastien Bubeck, Varun Chandrasekaran, Ronen El- dan, Johannes Gehrke, Eric Horvitz, Ece Kamar, Peter Lee, Yin Tat Lee, Yuanzhi Li, Scott Lund- berg, et al. 2023. Sparks of artificial general intelli- gence: Early experiments with gpt-4. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.12712. · arXiv
- Tom Bylander. 1994. The computational complexity of propositional strips planning. Artificial Intelligence, 69(1-2):165-204.
- Eduardo F Camacho and Carlos Bordons Alba. 2013. Model predictive control. Springer science & busi- ness media.
- Aakanksha Chowdhery, Sharan Narang, Jacob Devlin, Maarten Bosma, Gaurav Mishra, Adam Roberts, Paul Barham, Hyung Won Chung, Charles Sutton, Sebastian Gehrmann, et al. 2022. Palm: Scaling language modeling with pathways. arXiv preprint arXiv:2204.02311. · arXiv
- Karl Cobbe, Vineet Kosaraju, Mohammad Bavarian, Mark Chen, Heewoo Jun, Lukasz Kaiser, Matthias Plappert, Jerry Tworek, Jacob Hilton, Reiichiro Nakano, et al. 2021. Training verifiers to solve math word problems. arXiv preprint arXiv:2110.14168. · arXiv
- Rémi Coulom. 2007. Efficient selectivity and backup operators in monte-carlo tree search. In Comput- ers and Games: 5th International Conference, CG 2006, Turin, Italy, May 29-31, 2006. Revised Papers 5, pages 72-83. Springer.
- Yan Ding, Xiaohan Zhang, Chris Paxton, and Shiqi Zhang. 2023. Task and motion planning with large language models for object rearrangement. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.06247. · arXiv
- Dedre Gentner and Albert L Stevens. 2014. Mental models. Psychology Press.
- David Ha and Jürgen Schmidhuber. 2018a. Recurrent world models facilitate policy evolution. Advances in neural information processing systems, 31.
- David Ha and Jürgen Schmidhuber. 2018b. World mod- els. arXiv preprint arXiv:1803.10122. · arXiv
- Danijar Hafner, Timothy Lillicrap, Jimmy Ba, and Mo- hammad Norouzi. 2019. Dream to control: Learn- ing behaviors by latent imagination. arXiv preprint arXiv:1912.01603. · arXiv
- Danijar Hafner, Timothy Lillicrap, Mohammad Norouzi, and Jimmy Ba. 2020. Mastering atari with discrete world models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2010.02193. · arXiv
- Shibo Hao, Tianyang Liu, Zhen Wang, and Zhiting Hu. 2023a. Toolkengpt: Augmenting frozen language models with massive tools via tool embeddings. Ad- vances in neural information processing systems, 36.
- Shibo Hao, Bowen Tan, Kaiwen Tang, Bin Ni, Xiyan Shao, Hengzhe Zhang, Eric Xing, and Zhiting Hu. 2023b. Bertnet: Harvesting knowledge graphs with arbitrary relations from pretrained language models. In Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2023, pages 5000-5015.
- Mark K Ho, David Abel, Carlos G Correa, Michael L Littman, Jonathan D Cohen, and Thomas L Griffiths. 2021. Control of mental representations in human planning. arXiv e-prints, pages arXiv-2105.
- Jie Huang and Kevin Chen-Chuan Chang. 2022. To- wards reasoning in large language models: A survey. arXiv preprint arXiv:2212.10403. · arXiv
- Wenlong Huang, Fei Xia, Ted Xiao, Harris Chan, Jacky Liang, Pete Florence, Andy Zeng, Jonathan Tomp- son, Igor Mordatch, Yevgen Chebotar, et al. 2022. Inner monologue: Embodied reasoning through planning with language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2207.05608. 8163 · arXiv
- Quentin JM Huys, Neir Eshel, Elizabeth O'Nions, Luke Sheridan, Peter Dayan, and Jonathan P Roiser. 2012. Bonsai trees in your head: how the pavlovian system sculpts goal-directed choices by pruning decision trees. PLoS computational biology, 8(3):e1002410.
- Philip N Johnson-Laird. 2010. Mental models and human reasoning. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107(43):18243-18250.
- Philip Nicholas Johnson-Laird. 1983. Mental models: Towards a cognitive science of language, inference, and consciousness. 6. Harvard University Press.
- Ana Jojic, Zhen Wang, and Nebojsa Jojic. 2023. Gpt is becoming a turing machine: Here are some ways to program it. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.14310. · arXiv
- Levente Kocsis and Csaba Szepesvári. 2006. Bandit based monte-carlo planning. In Machine Learning: ECML 2006: 17th European Conference on Machine Learning Berlin, Germany, September 18-22, 2006 Proceedings 17, pages 282-293. Springer.
- Takeshi Kojima, Shixiang Shane Gu, Machel Reid, Yu- taka Matsuo, and Yusuke Iwasawa. 2022. Large lan- guage models are zero-shot reasoners. arXiv preprint arXiv:2205.11916. · arXiv
- Yann LeCun. 2022. A path towards autonomous ma- chine intelligence version 0.9. 2, 2022-06-27. Open Review, 62.
- Belinda Z Li, Maxwell Nye, and Jacob Andreas. 2022. Language modeling with latent situations. arXiv preprint arXiv:2212.10012. · arXiv
- Bo Liu, Yuqian Jiang, Xiaohan Zhang, Qiang Liu, Shiqi Zhang, Joydeep Biswas, and Peter Stone. 2023. Llm+ p: Empowering large language mod- els with optimal planning proficiency. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.11477. · arXiv
- Qing Lyu, Shreya Havaldar, Adam Stein, Li Zhang, Delip Rao, Eric Wong, Marianna Apidianaki, and Chris Callison-Burch. 2023. Faithful chain-of- thought reasoning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2301.13379. · arXiv
- Grégoire Mialon, Roberto Dessì, Maria Lomeli, Christo- foros Nalmpantis, Ram Pasunuru, Roberta Raileanu, Baptiste Rozière, Timo Schick, Jane Dwivedi-Yu, Asli Celikyilmaz, et al. 2023. Augmented language models: a survey. arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.07842. · arXiv
- Debjit Paul, Mete Ismayilzada, Maxime Peyrard, Beat- riz Borges, Antoine Bosselut, Robert West, and Boi Faltings. 2023. Refiner: Reasoning feedback on intermediate representations. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.01904. · arXiv
- Abulhair Saparov and He He. 2022. Language models are greedy reasoners: A systematic formal analysis of chain-of-thought. arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.01240. · arXiv
- Timo Schick, Jane Dwivedi-Yu, Roberto Dessì, Roberta Raileanu, Maria Lomeli, Luke Zettlemoyer, Nicola Cancedda, and Thomas Scialom. 2023. Toolformer: Language models can teach themselves to use tools. arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.04761. · arXiv
- Julian Schrittwieser, Ioannis Antonoglou, Thomas Hu- bert, Karen Simonyan, Laurent Sifre, Simon Schmitt, Arthur Guez, Edward Lockhart, Demis Hassabis, Thore Graepel, et al. 2020. Mastering atari, go, chess and shogi by planning with a learned model. Nature, 588(7839):604-609.
- Jay Schulkin. 2012. Action, perception and the brain: Adaptation and cephalic expression. Springer.
- Ramanan Sekar, Oleh Rybkin, Kostas Daniilidis, Pieter Abbeel, Danijar Hafner, and Deepak Pathak. 2020. Planning to explore via self-supervised world models. In International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 8583-8592. PMLR.
- Noah Shinn, Beck Labash, and Ashwin Gopinath. 2023. Reflexion: an autonomous agent with dynamic mem- ory and self-reflection. ArXiv, abs/2303.11366. · arXiv
- David Silver, Thomas Hubert, Julian Schrittwieser, Ioan- nis Antonoglou, Matthew Lai, Arthur Guez, Marc Lanctot, Laurent Sifre, Dharshan Kumaran, Thore Graepel, et al. 2017. Mastering chess and shogi by self-play with a general reinforcement learning algo- rithm. arXiv preprint arXiv:1712.01815. · arXiv
- Ishika Singh, Valts Blukis, Arsalan Mousavian, Ankit Goyal, Danfei Xu, Jonathan Tremblay, Dieter Fox, Jesse Thomason, and Animesh Garg. 2022. Progprompt: Generating situated robot task plans using large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2209.11302. · arXiv
- Edward C Tolman. 1948. Cognitive maps in rats and men. Psychological review, 55(4):189.
- Hugo Touvron, Thibaut Lavril, Gautier Izacard, Xavier Martinet, Marie-Anne Lachaux, Timothée Lacroix, Baptiste Rozière, Naman Goyal, Eric Hambro, Faisal Azhar, et al. 2023a. Llama: Open and effi- cient foundation language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.13971. · arXiv
- Hugo Touvron, Louis Martin, Kevin Stone, Peter Al- bert, Amjad Almahairi, Yasmine Babaei, Nikolay Bashlykov, Soumya Batra, Prajjwal Bhargava, Shruti Bhosale, et al. 2023b. Llama 2: Open founda- tion and fine-tuned chat models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.09288. · arXiv
- Karthik Valmeekam, Alberto Olmo, Sarath Sreedharan, and Subbarao Kambhampati. 2022. Large language models still can't plan (a benchmark for llms on plan- ning and reasoning about change). arXiv preprint arXiv:2206.10498. · arXiv
- Karthik Valmeekam, Sarath Sreedharan, Matthew Mar- quez, Alberto Olmo, and Subbarao Kambhampati. 2023. On the planning abilities of large language models (a critical investigation with a proposed benchmark). arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.06706. · arXiv
- Xuezhi Wang, Jason Wei, Dale Schuurmans, Quoc Le, Ed Chi, and Denny Zhou. 2022. Self-consistency im- proves chain of thought reasoning in language mod- els. arXiv preprint arXiv:2203.11171. · arXiv
- Jason Wei, Xuezhi Wang, Dale Schuurmans, Maarten Bosma, Ed Chi, Quoc Le, and Denny Zhou. 2022. Chain of thought prompting elicits reasoning in large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2201.11903. · arXiv
- Sean Welleck, Ximing Lu, Peter West, Faeze Brah- man, Tianxiao Shen, Daniel Khashabi, and Yejin Choi. 2022. Generating sequences by learning to self-correct. arXiv preprint arXiv:2211.00053. · arXiv
- Philipp Wu, Alejandro Escontrela, Danijar Hafner, Pieter Abbeel, and Ken Goldberg. 2023. Day- dreamer: World models for physical robot learning. In Conference on Robot Learning, pages 2226-2240.
- PMLR.
- Jiannan Xiang, Tianhua Tao, Yi Gu, Tianmin Shu, Zirui Wang, Zichao Yang, and Zhiting Hu. 2023. Language models meet world models: Embodied experiences enhance language models. Advances in neural infor- mation processing systems, 36.
- Shunyu Yao, Dian Yu, Jeffrey Zhao, Izhak Shafran, Thomas L Griffiths, Yuan Cao, and Karthik Narasimhan. 2023. Tree of thoughts: Deliberate problem solving with large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.10601. · arXiv
- Denny Zhou, Nathanael Schärli, Le Hou, Jason Wei, Nathan Scales, Xuezhi Wang, Dale Schuurmans, Olivier Bousquet, Quoc Le, and Ed Chi. 2022. Least-to-most prompting enables complex reason- ing in large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2205.10625. · arXiv
- Xinyu Zhu, Junjie Wang, Lin Zhang, Yuxiang Zhang, Ruyi Gan, Jiaxing Zhang, and Yujiu Yang. 2022. Solving math word problem via cooperative rea- soning induced language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.16257. · arXiv
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Tree of Thoughts: Deliberate Problem Solving with Large Language Models
Yao, S., Yu, D., Zhao, J., Shafran, I., Griffiths, T. L., Cao, Y., & Narasimhan, K. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2305.10601 · Cited by 1,158 · see citing works
The Rise and Potential of Large Language Model Based Agents: A Survey
Xi, Z., Chen, W., Guo, X., He, W., Ding, Y., Hong, B., Zhang, M., Wang, J., Jin, S., Zhou, E., et al. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2309.07864 · Cited by 972 · see citing works
A review of large language models and autonomous agents in chemistry
Ramos, M. C., Collison, C. J., & White, A. D. (2025) · Chemical Science · doi:10.1039/d4sc03921a · Cited by 274 · see citing works
Cognitive Architectures for Language Agents
Sumers, T. R., Yao, S., Narasimhan, K., & Griffiths, T. L. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2309.02427 · Cited by 72 · see citing works
“Depending on the form of action values, selection may occur via argmax, softmax, or an alternative such as majority vote (Wang et al., 2022b).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialShi, W., Xu, R., Zhuang, Y., Yu, Y., Zhang, J., Wu, H., Zhu, Y., Ho, J. C., Yang, C., & Wang, M. D. (2024) · Proceedings of the 2024 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing · doi:10.18653/v1/2024.emnlp-main.1245 · Cited by 54 · see citing works
“Alternatively, an autonomous agent could facilitate clinicians to communicate with EHRs in nat-ural languages, translating clinical questions into machine-interpretable queries, planning a sequence of actions, and ultimately delivering the final responses.”
BackgroundLarge Language Models Can Learn Temporal Reasoning
Xiong, S., Payani, A., Kompella, R., & Fekri, F. (2024) · Proceedings of the 62nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) · doi:10.18653/v1/2024.acl-long.563 · Cited by 47 · see citing works
PlanGenLLMs: A Modern Survey of LLM Planning Capabilities
Wei, H., Zhang, Z., He, S., Xia, T., Pan, S., & Liu, F. (2025) · Proceedings of the 63rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) · doi:10.18653/v1/2025.acl-long.958 · Cited by 36 · see citing works
Understanding the planning of LLM agents: A survey
Huang, X., Liu, W., Chen, X., Wang, X., Wang, H., Lian, D., Wang, Y., Tang, R., & Chen, E. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2402.02716 · Cited by 47 · see citing works
Token-Budget-Aware LLM Reasoning
Han, T., Wang, Z., Fang, C., Zhao, S., Ma, S., & Chen, Z. (2025) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2025 · doi:10.18653/v1/2025.findings-acl.1274 · Cited by 31 · see citing works
Self-citationEmbodied Agent Interface: Benchmarking LLMs for Embodied Decision Making
Li, M., Zhao, S., Wang, Q., Wang, K., Zhou, Y., Srivastava, S., Gokmen, C., Lee, T., Li, L., Zhang, R., et al. (2024) · Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 37 · doi:10.52202/079017-3188 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
Tang, H., Key, D., & Ellis, K. (2024) · Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 37 · doi:10.52202/079017-2243 · Cited by 20 · see citing works
Training Large Language Models to Reason in a Continuous Latent Space
Hao, S., Sukhbaatar, S., Su, D., Li, X., Hu, Z., Weston, J., & Tian, Y. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2412.06769 · Cited by 18 · see citing works
“While CoT has proven effective for certain tasks, its autoregressive generation nature makes it challenging to mimic human reasoning on more complex problems (LeCun, 2022; Hao et al., 2023), which typically require planning and search.”
Self-citationChatDB: Augmenting LLMs with Databases as Their Symbolic Memory
Hu, C., Fu, J., Du, C., Luo, S., Zhao, J., & Zhao, H. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2306.03901 · Cited by 13 · see citing works
“…as GPT-4 (OpenAI, 2023) and PaLM 2 (Anil et al., 2023), have increasingly become an essential component of modern artificial intelligence (AI) systems, revolutionizing our understanding of natural language processing (NLP) and transforming various industries (Hao et al., 2023; Wang et al., 2023).”
BackgroundLLMs Can't Plan, But Can Help Planning in LLM-Modulo Frameworks
Kambhampati, S., Valmeekam, K., Guan, L., Verma, M., Stechly, K., Bhambri, S., Saldyt, L., & Murthy, A. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2402.01817 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
“This has particularly been useful but largely overlooked in cases where LLMs are used as an actor to generate an admissible plan by interacting with a simulator, for example in the case of AlfWorld Yao et al. (2023b); Shinn et al. (2023) and Minecraft Wang et al. (2023).”
BackgroundMethodResultInfluentialRetroformer: Retrospective Large Language Agents with Policy Gradient Optimization
Yao, W., Heinecke, S., Niebles, J. C., Liu, Z., Feng, Y., Xue, L., Murthy, R., Chen, Z., Zhang, J., Arpit, D., et al. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2308.02151 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
“On the other hand, RAP (Hao et al., 2023) repurposes the LLM to function as both a world model and a reasoning agent.”
MethodLIMO: Less is More for Reasoning
Ye, Y., Huang, Z., Xiao, Y., Chern, E., Xia, S., & Liu, P. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2502.03387 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
“This can be achieved by augmenting LLMs with methods such as parallel sampling (Brown et al., 2024; Wang et al., 2022; Li et al., 2022) or symbolic tree search (Hao et al., 2023; Chen et al., 2024; Yao et al., 2023) to enhance reasoning ability.”
On the Self-Verification Limitations of Large Language Models on Reasoning and Planning Tasks
Stechly, K., Valmeekam, K., & Kambhampati, S. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2402.08115 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
“These take many forms: common search algorithms with the LLM cast in the role of heuristic [37, 11], approaches which reduce error rates by enforcing various consistency conditions [8, 6, 17], and direct LLM self-critique [27, 35, 5, 15, 21, 38].”
MethodToken-Budget-Aware LLM Reasoning
Han, T., Wang, Z., Fang, C., Zhao, S., Ma, S., & Chen, Z. (2024) · arXiv · Cited by 31 · see citing works
“Reasoning plays a crucial role in enabling large language models (LLM) to perform effectively across a wide range of tasks (Zhou et al., 2022; Hao et al., 2023, 2024a; Jin et al., 2024a; Wang et al., 2024b, 2025).”
Self-citationAgentSquare: Automatic LLM Agent Search in Modular Design Space
Shang, Y., Li, Y., Zhao, K., Ma, L., Liu, J., Xu, F., & Li, Y. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2410.06153 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
“LLM agents with several LLM-centric functional modules including planning (Hao et al., 2023; Zeng et al., 2024; Shao et al., 2025), reasoning (Wei et al., 2022; Yao et al., 2024; Shang et al., 2024; Xu et al., 2025), using tools (Shen et al., 2024; Schick et al., 2024), and monitoring memory (Wang…”
From Human Memory to AI Memory: A Survey on Memory Mechanisms in the Era of LLMs
Wu, Y., Liang, S., Zhang, C., Wang, Y., Zhang, Y., Guo, H., Tang, R., & Liu, Y. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2504.15965 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
“Reasoning & Planning Enhancement ReAct [24], RAP [94], Reflexion [95], Talker-Reasoner [96], TPTU [97] VI System Non-Parametric Long-Term”
Empowering Large Language Model Agent through Step-Level Self-Critique and Self-Training
Zhai, Y., Liu, H., Zhang, Z., Lin, T., Xu, K., Yang, C., Feng, D., Ding, B., & Wang, H. (2025) · Proceedings of the 48th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval · doi:10.1145/3726302.3729965 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
Ivanova, A. A., Sathe, A., Lipkin, B., Kumar, U., Radkani, S., Clark, T. H., Kauf, C., Hu, J., Pramod, R. T., Grand, G., et al. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2405.09605 · Cited by 2
“Our initial experiments revealed that supplying these examples substantially improves model performance, providing us with an opportunity to evaluate their “best shot” at EW O K-CORE -1.0.”
InfluentialGeneral agents contain world models
Richens, J., Abel, D., Bellot, A., & Everitt, T. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2506.01622 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
xLSTM 7B: A Recurrent LLM for Fast and Efficient Inference
Beck, M., Pöppel, K., Lippe, P., Kurle, R., Blies, P. M., Klambauer, G., Böck, S., & Hochreiter, S. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2503.13427
“By sampling multiple promising solutions, the best answers can be provided to the user or used as training targets (Yao et al., 2023; Hao et al., 2023; Guan et al., 2025).”
Process Supervision via Verbal Critique Improves Reasoning in Large Language Models
Chen, H.-Y. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2604.21611
“Sample breadth allocates parallel trajectories aggregated by majority voting Wang et al. [2023] or search Yao et al. [2023a], Hao et al. [2023].”
From Illusion to Insight: A Taxonomic Survey of Hallucination Mitigation Techniques in LLMs
Kazlaris, I., Antoniou, E., Diamantaras, K., & Bratsas, C. (2025) · doi:10.20944/preprints202508.1942.v1 · Cited by 13 · see citing works
Gemini 1.5: Unlocking multimodal understanding across millions of tokens of context
Gemini Team, Georgiev, P., Lei, V. I., Burnell, R., Bai, L., Gulati, A., Tanzer, G., Vincent, D., Pan, Z., Wang, S., et al. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2403.05530 · Cited by 306 · see citing works
Self-citation
- Authors
- Hao, S., Gu, Y., Ma, H., Hong, J. J., Wang, Z., Wang, D. Z., & Hu, Z.
- Affiliations
- University of Florida (US)
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2023
- Pages
- 8154-8173
- arXiv
- 2305.14992
- OpenAlex
- W4389520747
- Cited by
- 166
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 60 · 2025: 63 · 2024: 33 · 2023: 10
- FWCI
- 29.41
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI-based Problem Solving and Planning
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
- Keywords
- large language models, chain-of-thought prompting, world models, action planning, plan generation, Monte Carlo tree search, exploration-exploitation balance, mathematical reasoning, logical inference
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
