CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 24AI-based Problem Solving and PlanningNatural Language Processing TechniquesArtificial Intelligence in Games

Language Agent Tree Search Unifies Reasoning Acting and Planning in Language Models

Open access
Zhou, Andy, Yan, Kai, Shlapentokh-Rothman, Michal, Wang, Haohan, Wang, Yu-Xiong·2023·arXiv
DOI 10.48550/arxiv.2310.04406arXiv 2310.04406
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

While language models (LMs) have shown potential across a range of decision-making tasks, their reliance on simple acting processes limits their broad deployment as autonomous agents. In this paper, we introduce Language Agent Tree Search (LATS) -- the first general framework that synergizes the capabilities of LMs in reasoning, acting, and planning. By leveraging the in-context learning ability of LMs, we integrate Monte Carlo Tree Search into LATS to enable LMs as agents, along with LM-powered value functions and self-reflections for proficient exploration and enhanced decision-making. A key feature of our approach is the incorporation of an environment for external feedback, which offers a more deliberate and adaptive problem-solving mechanism that surpasses the constraints of existing techniques. Our experimental evaluation across diverse domains, including programming, interactive question-answering (QA), web navigation, and math, validates the effectiveness and generality of LATS in decision-making while maintaining competitive or improved reasoning performance. Notably, LATS achieves state-of-the-art pass@1 accuracy (92.7%) for programming on HumanEval with GPT-4 and demonstrates gradient-free performance (average score of 75.9) comparable to gradient-based fine-tuning for web navigation on WebShop with GPT-3.5. Code can be found at https://github.com/lapisrocks/LanguageAgentTreeSearch

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2310.04406

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Existing step-level methods for LLM agents primarily focus on selecting the optimal action at each step from multiple candidates.

    “Existing step-level methods for LLM agents [8-10] primarily focus on selecting the optimal action at each step from multiple candidates.”

    From Empowering Large Language Model Agent through Step-Level Self-Critique and Self-Training (2025) · cites this paper as [8]

    Section 4.1 says LATS samples multiple candidate actions at each step, and Section 4.2 describes evaluating and selecting promising nodes. But the paper frames LATS as searching for the best trajectory, balancing exploration and exploitation, rather than primarily selecting an optimal action independently at each step. The broader claim about what existing methods primarily do is therefore not fully supported by this source. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Both LATS and STeP marked some incorrectly completed tasks as correct.

    “For example, both LATS [65] and STeP [47] marked some incorrectly completed tasks as correct.”

    From AI Agents That Matter (2024) · cites this paper as [65]

    Section 5.2 (Programming) describes LATS using generated tests during search and a real test suite for final accuracy evaluation; Section 5.3 (WebShop) describes its success metric. Neither reports that LATS marked incorrectly completed tasks as correct. Searches for false positives and incorrectly marked successes found no such passage in our copy. The STeP portion belongs to its separate citation, not this source. (LLM, conf=0.72)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Both LATS and STeP removed a small number of tasks from the benchmark (1 and 8 tasks respectively).

    “Similarly, both agents removed a small number of tasks from the benchmark (1 and 8 tasks for LATS and STeP respectively).”

    From AI Agents That Matter (2024) · cites this paper as [65]

    The cited paper does not report that LATS removed one task from a benchmark or address STeP’s alleged removal of eight. Its Appendix D.2 instead says LATS used all 164 HumanEval problems; searches for removed or excluded tasks and STeP found no passage establishing the claimed counts. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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: 58

  1. Michael Ahn, Anthony Brohan, Noah Brown, Yevgen Cheb- otar, Omar Cortes, Byron David, Chelsea Finn, Chuyuan Fu, Keerthana Gopalakrishnan, Karol Hausman, Alex Herzog, Daniel Ho, Jasmine Hsu, Julian Ibarz, Brian Ichter, Alex Irpan, Eric Jang, Rosario Jauregui Ruano, Kyle Jeffrey, Sally Jesmonth, Nikhil J Joshi, Ryan Julian, Dmitry Kalashnikov, Yuheng Kuang, Kuang-Huei Lee, Sergey Levine, Yao Lu, Linda Luu, Carolina Parada, Peter Pastor, Jornell Quiambao, Kanishka Rao, Jarek Retting- house, Diego Reyes, Pierre Sermanet, Nicolas Sievers, Clayton Tan, Alexander Toshev, Vincent Vanhoucke, Fei Xia, Ted Xiao, Peng Xu, Sichun Xu, Mengyuan Yan, and Andy Zeng. Do as I can, not as I say: Grounding language in robotic affordances. In CoRL, 2022.
  2. Jacob Austin, Augustus Odena, Maxwell Nye, Maarten Bosma, Henryk Michalewski, David Dohan, Ellen Jiang, Carrie Cai, Michael Terry, Quoc Le, and Charles Sut- ton. Program synthesis with large language models. In NeurIPS, 2022.
  3. Bowen Baker, Ilge Akkaya, Peter Zhokhov, Joost Huizinga, Jie Tang, Adrien Ecoffet, Brandon Houghton, Raul Sampedro, and Jeff Clune. Video pretraining (VPT): Learning to act by watching unlabeled online videos. In NeurIPS, 2022.
  4. Maciej Besta, Nils Blach, Ales Kubicek, Robert Ger- stenberger, Lukas Gianinazzi, Joanna Gajda, Tomasz Lehmann, Michal Podstawski, Hubert Niewiadomski, Pi- otr Nyczyk, and Torsten Hoefler. Graph of thoughts: Solving elaborate problems with large language models. arXiv:2308.09687, 2023. · arXiv
  5. Samuel R Bowman, Gabor Angeli, Christopher Potts, and Christopher D Manning. A large annotated corpus for learning natural language inference. In EMNLP, 2015.
  6. Tom B. Brown, Benjamin Mann, Nick Ryder, Melanie Subbiah, Jared Kaplan, Prafulla Dhariwal, Arvind Nee- lakantan, Pranav Shyam, Girish Sastry, Amanda Askell, Sandhini Agarwal, Ariel Herbert-Voss, Gretchen Krueger, Tom Henighan, Rewon Child, Aditya Ramesh, Daniel M. Ziegler, Jeffrey Wu, Clemens Winter, Christopher Hesse, Mark Chen, Eric Sigler, Mateusz Litwin, Scott Gray, Benjamin Chess, Jack Clark, Christopher Berner, Sam McCandlish, Alec Radford, Ilya Sutskever, and Dario Amodei. Language models are few-shot learners. In NeurIPS, 2020.
  7. Bei Chen, Fengji Zhang, Anh Nguyen, Daoguang Zan, Zeqi Lin, Jian-Guang Lou, and Weizhu Chen. CodeT: Code generation with generated tests. In ICLR, 2023a.
  8. Mark Chen, Jerry Tworek, Heewoo Jun, Qiming Yuan, Henrique Ponde, Jared Kaplan, Harrison Edwards, Yura Burda, Nicholas Joseph, Greg Brockman, Alex Ray, Raul Puri, Gretchen Krueger, Michael Petrov, Heidy Khlaaf, Girish Sastry, Pamela Mishkin, Brooke Chan, Scott Gray, Nick Ryder, Mikhail Pavlov, Alethea Power, Lukasz Kaiser, Mohammad Bavarian, Clemens Winter, Philippe Tillet, Felipe Petroski Such, David W. Cum- mings, Matthias Plappert, Fotios Chantzis, Elizabeth Barnes, Ariel Herbert-Voss, William H. Guss, Alex Nichol, Igor Babuschkin, Suchir Balaji, Shantanu Jain, Andrew Carr, Jan Leike, Joshua Achiam, Vedant Misra, Evan Morikawa, Alec Radford, Matthew M. Knight, Miles Brundage, Mira Murati, Katie Mayer, Peter Welin- der, Bob McGrew, Dario Amodei, Sam McCandlish, Ilya Sutskever, and Wojciech Zaremba. Evaluating large lan- guage models trained on code. arXiv:2107.03374, 2021. · arXiv
  9. Wenhu Chen, Xueguang Ma, Xinyi Wang, and William W. Cohen. Program of thoughts prompting: disentangling computation from reasoning for numerical reasoning tasks. TMLR, 2023b. ISSN 2835-8856.
  10. Aakanksha Chowdhery, Sharan Narang, Jacob Devlin, Maarten Bosma, Gaurav Mishra, Adam Roberts, Paul Barham, Hyung Won Chung, Charles Sutton, Sebas- tian Gehrmann, Parker Schuh, Kensen Shi, Sasha Tsvyashchenko, Joshua Maynez, Abhishek Rao, Parker Barnes, Yi Tay, Noam Shazeer, Vinodkumar Prabhakaran, Emily Reif, Nan Du, Ben Hutchinson, Reiner Pope, James Bradbury, Jacob Austin, Michael Isard, Guy Gur- Ari, Pengcheng Yin, Toju Duke, Anselm Levskaya, San- jay Ghemawat, Sunipa Dev, Henryk Michalewski, Xavier Garcia, Vedant Misra, Kevin Robinson, Liam Fedus, Denny Zhou, Daphne Ippolito, David Luan, Hyeontaek Lim, Barret Zoph, Alexander Spiridonov, Ryan Sepa- ssi, David Dohan, Shivani Agrawal, Mark Omernick, Andrew M. Dai, Thanumalayan Sankaranarayana Pillai, Marie Pellat, Aitor Lewkowycz, Erica Moreira, Rewon Child, Oleksandr Polozov, Katherine Lee, Zongwei Zhou, Xuezhi Wang, Brennan Saeta, Mark Diaz, Orhan Firat, Michele Catasta, Jason Wei, Kathy Meier-Hellstern, Dou- glas Eck, Jeff Dean, Slav Petrov, and Noah Fiedel. PaLM: Scaling language modeling with pathways. JMLR, 24 (240):1-113, 2023.
  11. Karl Cobbe, Vineet Kosaraju, Mohammad Bavarian, Mark Chen, Heewoo Jun, Lukasz Kaiser, Matthias Plappert, Jerry Tworek, Jacob Hilton, Reiichiro Nakano, Christo- pher Hesse, and John Schulman. Training verifiers to solve math word problems. arXiv:2110.14168, 2021. · arXiv
  12. Xiang Deng, Yu Gu, Boyuan Zheng, Shijie Chen, Samuel Stevens, Boshi Wang, Huan Sun, and Yu Su. Mind2Web: Towards a generalist agent for the web. In NeurIPS Datasets and Benchmarks Track, 2023.
  13. Danny Driess, Fei Xia, Mehdi S. M. Sajjadi, Corey Lynch, Aakanksha Chowdhery, Brian Ichter, Ayzaan Wahid, Jonathan Tompson, Quan Vuong, Tianhe Yu, Wenlong Huang, Yevgen Chebotar, Pierre Sermanet, Daniel Duck- worth, Sergey Levine, Vincent Vanhoucke, Karol Haus- man, Marc Toussaint, Klaus Greff, Andy Zeng, Igor Mor- datch, and Pete Florence. PaLM-E: An embodied multi- modal language model. In ICML, 2023.
  14. Yilun Du, Mengjiao Yang, Bo Dai, Hanjun Dai, Ofir Nachum, Joshua B. Tenenbaum, Dale Schuurmans, and Pieter Abbeel. Learning universal policies via text-guided video generation. In NeurIPS, 2023.
  15. Jonathan St BT Evans. Intuition and reasoning: A dual- process perspective. Psychological Inquiry, pages 313 - 326, 2010.
  16. Linxi Fan, Guanzhi Wang, Yunfan Jiang, Ajay Mandlekar, Yuncong Yang, Haoyi Zhu, Andrew Tang, De-An Huang, Yuke Zhu, and Anima Anandkumar. MineDojo: Building open-ended embodied agents with internet-scale knowl- edge. In NeurIPS Datasets and Benchmarks Track, 2022.
  17. Hiroki Furuta, Ofir Nachum, Kuang-Huei Lee, Yutaka Mat- suo, Shixiang Shane Gu, and Izzeddin Gur. Multimodal web navigation with instruction-finetuned foundation models. In ICLR, 2024.
  18. Luyu Gao, Aman Madaan, Shuyan Zhou, Uri Alon, Pengfei Liu, Yiming Yang, Jamie Callan, and Graham Neubig. PAL: Program-aided language models. In ICML, 2023.
  19. Jiaxian Guo, Sidi Lu, Han Cai, Weinan Zhang, Yong Yu, and Jun Wang. Long text generation via adversarial training with leaked information. In AAAI, 2018.
  20. William H. Guss, Brandon Houghton, Nicholay Topin, Phillip Wang, Cayden Codel, Manuela Veloso, and Rus- lan Salakhutdinov. MineRL: A large-scale dataset of Minecraft demonstrations. In IJCAI, 2019.
  21. Danijar Hafner, Timothy Lillicrap, Ian Fischer, Ruben Ville- gas, David Ha, Honglak Lee, and James Davidson. Learn- ing latent dynamics for planning from pixels. In ICML, 2019.
  22. Danijar Hafner, Jurgis Pasukonis, Jimmy Ba, and Timo- thy Lillicrap. Mastering diverse domains through world models. arXiv:2301.04104, 2023. · arXiv
  23. Shibo Hao, Yi Gu, Haodi Ma, Joshua Jiahua Hong, Zhen Wang, Daisy Zhe Wang, and Zhiting Hu. Reasoning with language model is planning with world model. In EMNLP, 2023.
  24. Jie Huang, Xinyun Chen, Swaroop Mishra, Huaixiu Steven Zheng, Adams Wei Yu, Xinying Song, and Denny Zhou. Large language models cannot self-correct reasoning yet. In ICLR, 2024.
  25. Wenlong Huang, F. Xia, Ted Xiao, Harris Chan, Jacky Liang, Peter R. Florence, Andy Zeng, Jonathan Tompson, Igor Mordatch, Yevgen Chebotar, Pierre Sermanet, Noah Brown, Tomas Jackson, Linda Luu, Sergey Levine, Karol Hausman, and Brian Ichter. Inner monologue: Embodied reasoning through planning with language models. In CoRL, 2022.
  26. Levente Kocsis and Csaba Szepesvári. Bandit based monte- carlo planning. In ECML, 2006.
  27. Takeshi Kojima, Shixiang Shane Gu, Machel Reid, Yutaka Matsuo, and Yusuke Iwasawa. Large language models are zero-shot reasoners. In NeurIPS, 2022.
  28. Evan Zheran Liu, Kelvin Guu, Panupong Pasupat, Tianlin Shi, and Percy Liang. Reinforcement learning on web interfaces using workflow-guided exploration. In ICLR, 2018.
  29. Xiao Liu, Hao Yu, Hanchen Zhang, Yifan Xu, Xuanyu Lei, Hanyu Lai, Yu Gu, Hangliang Ding, Kaiwen Men, Kejuan Yang, Shudan Zhang, Xiang Deng, Aohan Zeng, Zhengxiao Du, Chenhui Zhang, Sheng Shen, Tianjun Zhang, Yu Su, Huan Sun, Minlie Huang, Yuxiao Dong, and Jie Tang. AgentBench: Evaluating LLMs as agents. In ICLR, 2024.
  30. Zhihan Liu, Hao Hu, Shenao Zhang, Hongyi Guo, Shuqi Ke, Boyi Liu, and Zhaoran Wang. Reason for fu- ture, act for now: A principled framework for au- tonomous LLM agents with provable sample efficiency. arXiv:2309.17382, 2023. · arXiv
  31. Aman Madaan, Niket Tandon, Prakhar Gupta, Skyler Hal- linan, Luyu Gao, Sarah Wiegreffe, Uri Alon, Nouha Dziri, Shrimai Prabhumoye, Yiming Yang, Shashank Gupta, Bodhisattwa Prasad Majumder, Katherine Her- mann, Sean Welleck, Amir Yazdanbakhsh, and Peter Clark. Self-refine: Iterative refinement with self-feedback. In NeurIPS, 2023.
  32. OpenAI. GPT-4 technical report. arXiv:2303.08774, 2023. · arXiv
  33. Yujia Qin, Shihao Liang, Yining Ye, Kunlun Zhu, Lan Yan, Yaxi Lu, Yankai Lin, Xin Cong, Xiangru Tang, Bill Qian, Sihan Zhao, Runchu Tian, Ruobing Xie, Jie Zhou, Mark Gerstein, Dahai Li, Zhiyuan Liu, and Maosong Sun. ToolLLM: Facilitating large language models to master 16000+ real-world APIs. In ICLR, 2024.
  34. Abulhair Saparov and He He. Language models are greedy reasoners: A systematic formal analysis of chain-of- thought. In ICLR, 2023.
  35. Timo Schick, Jane Dwivedi-Yu, Roberto Dessì, Roberta Raileanu, Maria Lomeli, Luke Zettlemoyer, Nicola Can- cedda, and Thomas Scialom. Toolformer: Language models can teach themselves to use tools. In NeurIPS, 2023.
  36. Yongliang Shen, Kaitao Song, Xu Tan, Dongsheng Li, Weiming Lu, and Yueting Zhuang. HuggingGPT: Solving AI tasks with ChatGPT and its friends in Hugging Face. In NeurIPS, 2023.
  37. Noah Shinn, Federico Cassano, Beck Labash, Ashwin Gopinath, Karthik Narasimhan, and Shunyu Yao. Reflex- ion: Language agents with verbal reinforcement learning. In NeurIPS, 2023.
  38. Mohit Shridhar, Xingdi Yuan, Marc-Alexandre Côté, Yonatan Bisk, Adam Trischler, and Matthew Hausknecht. ALFWorld: Aligning text and embodied environments for interactive learning. In ICLR, 2020.
  39. David Silver, Aja Huang, Chris J. Maddison, Arthur Guez, L. Sifre, George van den Driessche, Julian Schrittwieser, Ioannis Antonoglou, Vedavyas Panneershelvam, Marc Lanctot, Sander Dieleman, Dominik Grewe, John Nham, Nal Kalchbrenner, Ilya Sutskever, Timothy P. Lillicrap, Madeleine Leach, Koray Kavukcuoglu, Thore Graepel, and Demis Hassabis. Mastering chess and Shogi by self- play with a general reinforcement learning algorithm. arXiv:1712.01815, 2017. · arXiv
  40. Steven A. Sloman. The empirical case for two systems of reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 119:3-22, 1996.
  41. Haotian Sun, Yuchen Zhuang, Lingkai Kong, Bo Dai, and Chao Zhang. AdaPlanner: Adaptive planning from feed- back with language models. In NeurIPS, 2023.
  42. Dídac Surís, Sachit Menon, and Carl Vondrick. ViperGPT: Visual inference via Python execution for reasoning. In ICCV, 2023.
  43. Maciej Swiechowski, Konrad Godlewski, Bartosz Sawicki, and Jacek Ma'ndziuk. Monte Carlo tree search: A re- view of recent modifications and applications. Artificial Intelligence Review, 56:2497-2562, 2021.
  44. Hugo Touvron, Louis Martin, Kevin R. Stone, Peter Al- bert, Amjad Almahairi, Yasmine Babaei, Nikolay Bash- lykov, Soumya Batra, Prajjwal Bhargava, Shruti Bhos- ale, Daniel M. Bikel, Lukas Blecher, Cristian Cantón Ferrer, Moya Chen, Guillem Cucurull, David Esiobu, Jude Fernandes, Jeremy Fu, Wenyin Fu, Brian Fuller, Cynthia Gao, Vedanuj Goswami, Naman Goyal, An- thony S. Hartshorn, Saghar Hosseini, Rui Hou, Hakan Inan, Marcin Kardas, Viktor Kerkez, Madian Khabsa, Is- abel M. Kloumann, A. V. Korenev, Punit Singh Koura, Marie-Anne Lachaux, Thibaut Lavril, Jenya Lee, Diana Liskovich, Yinghai Lu, Yuning Mao, Xavier Martinet, Todor Mihaylov, Pushkar Mishra, Igor Molybog, Yixin Nie, Andrew Poulton, Jeremy Reizenstein, Rashi Rungta, Kalyan Saladi, Alan Schelten, Ruan Silva, Eric Michael Smith, R. Subramanian, Xia Tan, Binh Tang, Ross Taylor, Adina Williams, Jian Xiang Kuan, Puxin Xu, Zhengxu Yan, Iliyan Zarov, Yuchen Zhang, Angela Fan, Melanie Kambadur, Sharan Narang, Aurelien Rodriguez, Robert Stojnic, Sergey Edunov, and Thomas Scialom. Llama 2: Open foundation and fine-tuned chat models. arXiv:2307.09288, 2023. · arXiv
  45. Tom Vodopivec, Spyridon Samothrakis, and Branko Ster. On Monte Carlo tree search and reinforcement learning. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 60:881-936, 2017.
  46. Guanzhi Wang, Yuqi Xie, Yunfan Jiang, Ajay Mandlekar, Chaowei Xiao, Yuke Zhu, Linxi Fan, and Anima Anand- kumar. Voyager: An open-ended embodied agent with large language models. arXiv:2305.16291, 2023. · arXiv
  47. Xuezhi Wang, Jason Wei, Dale Schuurmans, Quoc Le, Ed Chi, and Denny Zhou. Self-consistency improves chain of thought reasoning in language models. In ICLR, 2022.
  48. Jason Wei, Xuezhi Wang, Dale Schuurmans, Maarten Bosma, Ed Chi, Quoc Le, and Denny Zhou. Chain of thought prompting elicits reasoning in large language models. In NeurIPS, 2022.
  49. Michael Wooldridge and Nicholas R Jennings. Intelligent agents: Theory and practice. The Knowledge Engineering Review, 10:115 -152, 1995.
  50. Philipp Wu, Alejandro Escontrela, Danijar Hafner, Pieter Abbeel, and Ken Goldberg. Daydreamer: World models for physical robot learning. In CoRL, 2023.
  51. Yuxi Xie, Kenji Kawaguchi, Yiran Zhao, Xu Zhao, Min- Yen Kan, Junxian He, and Qizhe Xie. Decomposition enhances reasoning via self-evaluation guided decoding. arXiv:2305.00633, 2023. · arXiv
  52. Zhilin Yang, Peng Qi, Saizheng Zhang, Yoshua Bengio, William W Cohen, Ruslan Salakhutdinov, and Christo- pher D Manning. HotpotQA: A dataset for diverse, ex- plainable multi-hop question answering. In EMNLP, 2018.
  53. Shunyu Yao, Howard Chen, John Yang, and Karthik R Narasimhan. WebShop: Towards scalable real-world web interaction with grounded language agents. In NeurIPS, 2022.
  54. Shunyu Yao, Dian Yu, Jeffrey Zhao, Izhak Shafran, Thomas L. Griffiths, Yuan Cao, and Karthik Narasimhan. Tree of thoughts: deliberate problem solving with large language models. In NeurIPS, 2023a.
  55. Shunyu Yao, Jeffrey Zhao, Dian Yu, Nan Du, Izhak Shafran, Karthik Narasimhan, and Yuan Cao. ReAct: Synergizing reasoning and acting in language models. In ICLR, 2023b.
  56. Weirui Ye, Shaohuai Liu, Thanard Kurutach, Pieter Abbeel, and Yang Gao. Mastering Atari games with limited data. In NeurIPS, 2021.
  57. Denny Zhou, Nathanael Schärli, Le Hou, Jason Wei, Nathan Scales, Xuezhi Wang, Dale Schuurmans, Olivier Bous- quet, Quoc Le, and Ed Chi. Least-to-most prompting enables complex reasoning in large language models. In ICLR, 2022.
  58. Yuchen Zhuang, Xiang Chen, Tong Yu, Saayan Mitra, Victor Bursztyn, Ryan A. Rossi, Somdeb Sarkhel, and Chao Zhang. ToolChain*: Efficient action space navigation in large language models with A* search. In ICLR, 2023.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Zhou, A., Yan, K., Shlapentokh-Rothman, M., Wang, H., & Wang, Y.-X.
ORCID
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2023
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.2310.04406
arXiv
2310.04406
OpenAlex
W4389422760
Cited by
18
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 6
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (2106825)
  • Nvidia
  • National Centre for Supercomputing Applications
  • National Institute of Food and Agriculture (#2020-67021-32799, 32799, 67021)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI-based Problem Solving and Planning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Artificial Intelligence in Games
Keywords
language agents, tree search, Monte Carlo tree search, language models, reasoning, planning, acting, in-context learning, value function, self-reflection, external feedback, autonomous agents, programming, question answering, web navigation, mathematical reasoning

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