Small Language Models Need Strong Verifiers to Self-Correct Reasoning
Open accessAbstract
Self-correction has emerged as a promising solution to boost the reasoning performance of large language models (LLMs), where LLMs refine their solutions using self-generated critiques that pinpoint the errors. This work explores whether small (<= 13B) language models (LMs) have the ability of self-correction on reasoning tasks with minimal inputs from stronger LMs. We propose a novel pipeline that prompts smaller LMs to collect self-correction data that supports the training of self-refinement abilities. First, we leverage correct solutions to guide the model in critiquing their incorrect responses. Second, the generated critiques, after filtering, are used for supervised fine-tuning of the self-correcting reasoner through solution refinement. Our experimental results show improved self-correction abilities of two models on five datasets spanning math and commonsense reasoning, with notable performance gains when paired with a strong GPT-4-based verifier, though limitations are identified when using a weak self-verifier for determining when to correct.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
[240] introduces SCORE, a pipeline that generates self-correction data from SLMs and fine-tunes the model to function as a self-correcting reasoner.
“while [240] introduces SCORE, a pipeline that generates self-correction data from SLMs and fine-tunes the model to function as a self-correcting reasoner.”
From Stop Overthinking: A Survey on Efficient Reasoning for Large Language Models (2025) · cites this paper as [240]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A Survey of Post-Training Scaling in Large Language Models
Lai, H., Liu, X., Gao, J., Cheng, J., Qi, Z., Xu, Y., Yao, S., Zhang, D., Du, J., Hou, Z., et al. (2025) · Proceedings of the 63rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) · doi:10.18653/v1/2025.acl-long.140 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
Stop Overthinking: A Survey on Efficient Reasoning for Large Language Models
Sui, Y., Chuang, Y.-N., Wang, G., Zhang, J., Zhang, T., Yuan, J., Liu, H., Wen, A., Zhong, S., Zou, N., et al. (2025) · arXiv · Cited by 2 · see citing works
“Furthermore, [49] proposed SKIntern, a framework that internalizes symbolic knowledge into SLM to improve CoT reasoning quality and efficiency, while [109] introduces SCORE, a pipeline that generates self-correction data from SLMs and fine-tunes the model to function as a self-correcting reasoner.”
From Harm to Help: Turning Reasoning In-Context Demos into Assets for Reasoning LMs
Wang, H., Liang, W., Fu, Z., Zheng, N., Zhang, Y., Tong, Y., Zhu, T., Jiang, H., Li, C., Wu, J., et al. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2509.23196
Self-citationLi, H., Feng, L., & Wang, D. (2026) · Electronics · doi:10.3390/electronics15102011
Can LLMs Correct Themselves? A Benchmark of Self-Correction in LLMs
Tie, G., Yuan, Z., Zhao, Z., Hu, C., Gu, T., Zhang, R., Zhang, S., Wu, J., Tu, X., Jin, M., et al. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2510.16062
“Fine-tuned methods, such as DCoT [45], Supercorrect [69], and SCORE [76], further enhance the performance of the model by fine-tuning it for specific tasks, enabling more accurate and efficient handling of complex tasks.”
- Authors
- Zhang, Y., Khalifa, M., Logeswaran, L., Kim, J., Lee, M., Lee, H., & Wang, L.
- Affiliations
- University of Michigan (US)
- University of Illinois Chicago (US)
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2024
- Pages
- 15637-15653
- arXiv
- 2404.17140
- OpenAlex
- W4402669701
- Cited by
- 6
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 1
- FWCI
- 1.73
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL (Findings of ACL) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Multimodal Machine Learning Applications
- Keywords
- self-correction, small language models, self-refinement, reasoning, solution refinement, mathematical reasoning, commonsense reasoning, GPT-4
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