CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 52Topic ModelingNatural Language Processing TechniquesMultimodal Machine Learning Applications

Multi-Step Reasoning with Large Language Models, a Survey

Open access
Plaat, Aske, Wong, Annie, Verberne, Suzan, Broekens, Joost, van Stein, Niki, Back, Thomas·2024·arXiv
DOI 10.48550/arxiv.2407.11511arXiv 2407.11511
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Large language models (LLMs) with billions of parameters exhibit in-context learning abilities, enabling few-shot learning on tasks that the model was not specifically trained for. Traditional models achieve breakthrough performance on language tasks, but do not perform well on basic reasoning benchmarks. However, a new in-context learning approach, Chain-of-thought, has demonstrated strong multi-step reasoning abilities on these benchmarks. The research on LLM reasoning abilities started with the question whether LLMs can solve grade school math word problems, and has expanded to other tasks in the past few years. This article reviews the field of multi-step reasoning with LLMs. We propose a taxonomy that identifies different ways to generate, evaluate, and control multi-step reasoning. We provide an in-depth coverage of core approaches and open problems, and we propose a research agenda for the near future. We find that multi-step reasoning approaches have progressed beyond math word problems, and can now successfully solve challenges in logic, combinatorial games, and robotics, sometimes by first generating code that is then executed by external tools. Many studies in multi-step methods use reinforcement learning for finetuning, external optimization loops, in-context reinforcement learning, and self-reflection.

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.2407.11511

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?

  • The survey says that current LLMs have set impressive records in reasoning, but whether they use a human-like reasoning procedure remains controversial.

    “LLMs have set impressive records in reasoning (Wu et al., 2025a; Kıcıman et al., 2024; Plaat et al., 2024), though it remains controversial whether LLMs really leverage a human-like reasoning procedure”

    From Large Language Model Reasoning Failures (2026) · cites this paper as Plaat et al., 2024

  • LLMs have set impressive records in reasoning, but it remains controversial whether they really leverage a human-like reasoning procedure when attempting these tasks.

    “LLMs have set impressive records in reasoning (Wu et al., 2025a; Kıcıman et al., 2024; Plaat et al., 2024), though it remains controversial whether LLMs really leverage a human-like reasoning procedure when”

    From Large Language Model Reasoning Failures (2026) · cites this paper as Plaat et al., 2024

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 8 · Cited by 52

Research works printed but not linked: 193

  1. Janice Ahn, Rishu Verma, Renze Lou, Di Liu, Rui Zhang, and Wenpeng Yin. 2024. Large language models for mathematical reasoning: Progresses and challenges. arXiv:2402.00157. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2402.00157 · arXiv
  2. Michael Ahn, Anthony Brohan, Noah Brown, Yevgen Chebotar, Omar Cortes, Byron David, Chelsea Finn, Chuyuan Fu, Keerthana Gopalakrishnan, Karol Hausman, et al. 2022. Do as I can, not as I say: Grounding language in robotic affordances. arXiv:2204.01691. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2204.01691 · arXiv
  3. Aida Amini, Saadia Gabriel, Peter Lin, Rik Koncel-Kedziorski, Yejin Choi, and Hannaneh Hajishirzi. 2019. Mathqa: Towards interpretable math word problem solving with operation-based formalisms. In Proceedings of the 2019 Confer- ence of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics. arXiv preprint arXiv:1905.13319. · arXiv
  4. Arian Askari, Roxana Petcu, Chuan Meng, Mohammad Aliannejadi, Amin Abolghasemi, Evangelos Kanoulas, and Suzan Verberne. 2024. SOLID: Self-seeding and multi-intent self-instructing LLMs for generating intent-aware information-seeking dialogs. arXiv:2402.11633. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2402.11633 · arXiv
  5. Gasper Begus, Maksymilian Dabkowski, and Ryan Rhodes. 2025. Large linguistic models: Investigating LLMs' metalinguistic abilities. IEEE Transactions on Artificial Intelligence (2025).
  6. Richard Bellman. 1966. Dynamic programming. Science 153, 3731 (1966), 34-37.
  7. Emily M. Bender, Timnit Gebru, Angelina McMillan-Major, and Shmargaret Shmitchell. 2021. On the dangers of stochastic parrots: Can language models be too big?. In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency. 610-623.
  8. Yoshua Bengio, Jérôme Louradour, Ronan Collobert, and Jason Weston. 2009. Curriculum learning. In Proceedings of the 26th Annual International Conference on Machine Learning. 41-48.
  9. Leonard Bereska and Efstratios Gavves. 2024. Mechanistic interpretability for AI safety-A review. Transactions on Machine Learning Research, arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.14082 (2024). · arXiv
  10. Lukas Berglund, Meg Tong, Max Kaufmann, Mikita Balesni, Asa Cooper Stickland, Tomasz Korbak, and Owain Evans. 2024. The reversal curse: LLMs trained on A is B fail to learn B is A. arXiv:2309.12288. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2309.12288 · arXiv
  11. Maciej Besta, Nils Blach, Ales Kubicek, Robert Gerstenberger, Michal Podstawski, Lukas Gianinazzi, Joanna Gajda, Tomasz Lehmann, Hubert Niewiadomski, Piotr Nyczyk, et al. 2024. Graph of thoughts: Solving elabo- rate problems with large language models. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 38. 17682-17690.
  12. Bernd Bohnet, Azade Nova, Aaron T. Parisi, Kevin Swersky, Katayoon Goshvadi, Hanjun Dai, Dale Schuurmans, Noah Fiedel, and Hanie Sedghi. 2024. Exploring and benchmarking the planning capabilities of large language models. arXiv:2406.13094. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2406.13094 · arXiv
  13. Leo Breiman. 2001. Random forests. Machine Learning 45 (2001), 5-32.
  14. Joost Broekens, Bernhard Hilpert, Suzan Verberne, Kim Baraka, Patrick Gebhard, and Aske Plaat. 2023. Fine-grained affective processing capabilities emerging from large language models. In Proceedings of the 2023 11th Intl Conf on Affective Computing and Intelligent Interaction (ACII). IEEE, 1-8.
  15. Rodney A. Brooks. 1990. Elephants don't play chess. Robotics and Autonomous Systems 6, 1-2 (1990), 3-15.
  16. 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 (2020), 1877-1901.
  17. Patrick Bryant, Gabriele Pozzati, and Arne Elofsson. 2022. Improved prediction of protein-protein interactions using AlphaFold2. Nature Communications 13, 1 (2022), 1265.
  18. Mark Chen, Jerry Tworek, Heewoo Jun, Qiming Yuan, Henrique Ponde de Oliveira Pinto, Jared Kaplan, Harri Edwards, Yuri Burda, Nicholas Joseph, Greg Brockman, et al. 2021. Evaluating large language models trained on code. arXiv:2107.03374. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2107.03374 · arXiv
  19. Wenhu Chen, Xueguang Ma, Xinyi Wang, and William W. Cohen. 2023. Program of thoughts prompting: Disen- tangling computation from reasoning for numerical reasoning tasks. Transactions of Machine Learning Research. arXiv:2211.12588. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2211.12588 · arXiv
  20. Xinyun Chen, Chen Liang, Adams Wei Yu, Denny Zhou, Dawn Song, and Quoc V. Le. 2019. Neural symbolic reader: Scalable integration of distributed and symbolic representations for reading comprehension. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Learning Representations.
  21. Xinyun Chen, Maxwell Lin, Nathanael Schärli, and Denny Zhou. 2024. Teaching large language models to self-debug. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Learning Representations. Retrieved from https://openreview. net/forum?id=KuPixIqPiq
  22. Xi Chen, Aske Plaat, and Niki van Stein. 2025. How does chain of thought think? Mechanistic interpretability of chain- of-thought reasoning with sparse autoencoding. arXiv:2507.22928. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2507.22928 · arXiv
  23. Ting-Rui Chiang and Yun-Nung Chen. 2019. Semantically-aligned equation generation for solving and reasoning math word problems. arXiv:1811.00720. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/1811.00720 · arXiv
  24. Wonje Choi, Woo Kyung Kim, Minjong Yoo, and Honguk Woo. 2024. Embodied CoT distillation from llm to off-the-shelf agents. In Forty-first International Conference on Machine Learning. 8702-8721.
  25. Aakanksha Chowdhery, Sharan Narang, Jacob Devlin, Maarten Bosma, Gaurav Mishra, Adam Roberts, Paul Barham, Hyung Won Chung, Charles Sutton, Sebastian Gehrmann, et al. 2023. Palm: Scaling language modeling with pathways. Journal of Machine Learning Research 24, 240 (2023), 1-113.
  26. Tianzhe Chu, Yuexiang Zhai, Jihan Yang, Shengbang Tong, Saining Xie, Dale Schuurmans, Quoc V. Le, Sergey Levine, and Yi Ma. 2025. SFT memorizes, RL generalizes: A comparative study of foundation model post-training. arXiv:2501.17161. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.17161 · arXiv
  27. Zheng Chu, Jingchang Chen, Qianglong Chen, Weijiang Yu, Tao He, Haotian Wang, Weihua Peng, Ming Liu, Bing Qin, and Ting Liu. 2024. Navigate through enigmatic labyrinth a survey of chain of thought reasoning: Advances, frontiers and future. In Proceedings of the 62nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers). 1173-1203.
  28. Zheng Chu, Jingchang Chen, Qianglong Chen, Weijiang Yu, Tao He, Haotian Wang, Weihua Peng, Ming Liu, Bing Qin, and Ting Liu. 2024. A survey of chain of thought reasoning: Advances, frontiers and futurearXiv:2309.15402. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2309.15402 · arXiv
  29. Yu-Neng Chuang, Guanchu Wang, Chia-Yuan Chang, Ruixiang Tang, Fan Yang, Mengnan Du, Xuanting Cai, and Xia Hu. 2024. FaithLM: Towards faithful explanations for large language models. arXiv:2402.04678. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2402.04678 · arXiv
  30. Nathan Cloos, Meagan Jens, Michelangelo Naim, Yen-Ling Kuo, Ignacio Cases, Andrei Barbu, and Christopher J. Cueva. 2024. Baba is AI: Break the rules to beat the benchmark. arXiv:2407.13729. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/ abs/2407.13729 · arXiv
  31. 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:2110.14168. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2110.14168 · arXiv
  32. Corinna Cortes and Vladimir Vapnik. 1995. Support-vector networks. Machine Learning 20 (1995), 273-297.
  33. Zhuyun Dai, Vincent Y. Zhao, Ji Ma, Yi Luan, Jianmo Ni, Jing Lu, Anton Bakalov, Kelvin Guu, Keith B. Hall, and Ming-Wei Chang. 2023. Promptagator: Few-shot dense retrieval from 8 examples. arXiv:2209.11755. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2209.11755 · arXiv
  34. Can Demircan, Tankred Saanum, Akshay K. Jagadish, Marcel Binz, and Eric Schulz. 2024. Sparse autoencoders reveal temporal difference learning in large language models. arXiv:2410.01280. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2410. 01280 · arXiv
  35. Aniket Didolkar, Anirudh Goyal, Nan Rosemary Ke, Siyuan Guo, Michal Valko, Timothy Lillicrap, Danilo Rezende, Yoshua Bengio, Michael Mozer, and Sanjeev Arora. 2024. Metacognitive capabilities of LLMs: An exploration in mathematical problem solving. arXiv:2405.12205. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2405.12205 · arXiv
  36. Qingxiu Dong, Lei Li, Damai Dai, Ce Zheng, Zhiyong Wu, Baobao Chang, Xu Sun, Jingjing Xu, and Zhifang Sui. 2023. A survey on in-context learning. arXiv:2301.00234. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2301.00234 · arXiv
  37. Angang Du, Bofei Gao, Bowei Xing, Changjiu Jiang, Cheng Chen, Cheng Li, Chenjun Xiao, Chenzhuang Du, Chonghua Liao, et al. 2025. Kimi k1.5: Scaling reinforcement learning with LLMs. arXiv:2501.12599. Retrieved from https: //arxiv.org/abs/2501.12599 · arXiv
  38. Benjamin Eysenbach, Abhishek Gupta, Julian Ibarz, and Sergey Levine. 2019. Diversity is all you need: Learning skills without a reward function. arXiv:1802.06070. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/1802.06070 · arXiv
  39. Linxi Fan, Guanzhi Wang, Yunfan Jiang, Ajay Mandlekar, Yuncong Yang, Haoyi Zhu, Andrew Tang, De-An Huang, Yuke Zhu, et al. 2022. Minedojo: Building open-ended embodied agents with internet-scale knowledge. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 35 (2022), 18343-18362.
  40. Richard E. Fikes and Nils J. Nilsson. 1971. STRIPS: A new approach to the application of theorem proving to problem solving. Artificial Intelligence 2, 3-4 (1971), 189-208.
  41. Chelsea Finn, Pieter Abbeel, and Sergey Levine. 2017. Model-agnostic meta-learning for fast adapta- tion of deep networks. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Machine Learning. PMLR, 1126-1135.
  42. Peter Flach. 2012. Machine Learning: The Art and Science of Algorithms that Make Sense of Data. Cambridge University Press.
  43. Yao Fu, Hao Peng, Ashish Sabharwal, Peter Clark, and Tushar Khot. 2022. Complexity-based prompting for multi-step reasoning. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Learning Representations.
  44. Luyu Gao, Aman Madaan, Shuyan Zhou, Uri Alon, Pengfei Liu, Yiming Yang, Jamie Callan, and Graham Neubig. 2023. Pal: Program-aided language models. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Machine Learning. PMLR, 10764-10799.
  45. Peizhong Gao, Ao Xie, Shaoguang Mao, Wenshan Wu, Yan Xia, Haipeng Mi, and Furu Wei. 2024. Meta reasoning for large language models. arXiv:2406.11698. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2406.11698 · arXiv
  46. Louie Giray. 2023. Prompt engineering with ChatGPT: A guide for academic writers. Annals of Biomedical Engineering 51, 12 (2023), 2629-2633.
  47. Ian Goodfellow, Yoshua Bengio, and Aaron Courville. 2016. Deep Learning. MIT Press.
  48. Yuxian Gu, Li Dong, Furu Wei, and Minlie Huang. 2023. MiniLLM: Knowledge distillation of large language models. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Learning Representations.
  49. Daya Guo, Dejian Yang, Haowei Zhang, Junxiao Song, Ruoyu Zhang, Runxin Xu, Qihao Zhu, Shirong Ma, Peiyi Wang, Xiao Bi, et al. 2025. DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing reasoning capability in LLMs via reinforcement learning. arXiv:2501.12948. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.12948 · arXiv
  50. Simeng Han, Hailey Schoelkopf, Yilun Zhao, Zhenting Qi, Martin Riddell, Wenfei Zhou, James Coady, David Peng, Yujie Qiao, Luke Benson, et al. 2022. Folio: Natural language reasoning with first-order logic. arXiv:2209.00840. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2209.00840 · arXiv
  51. Nikolaus Hansen and Raymond Ros. 2010. Black-box optimization benchmarking of NEWUOA compared to BIPOP- CMA-ES: on the BBOB noiseless testbed. In Proceedings of the 12th Annual Conference Companion on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation. 1519-1526.
  52. Dan Hendrycks, Collin Burns, Saurav Kadavath, Akul Arora, Steven Basart, Eric Tang, Dawn Song, and Jacob Steinhardt. 2021. Measuring mathematical problem solving with the math dataset. arXiv:2103.03874. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2103.03874 · arXiv
  53. Tom Henighan, Jared Kaplan, Mor Katz, Mark Chen, Christopher Hesse, Jacob Jackson, Heewoo Jun, Tom B. Brown, Prafulla Dhariwal, Scott Gray, et al. 2020. Scaling laws for autoregressive generative modeling. arXiv:2010.14701. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2010.14701 · arXiv
  54. Jordan Hoffmann, Sebastian Borgeaud, Arthur Mensch, Elena Buchatskaya, Trevor Cai, Eliza Rutherford, Diego de Las Casas, Lisa Anne Hendricks, Johannes Welbl, Aidan Clark, et al. 2022. Training compute-optimal large language models. arXiv:2203.15556. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2203.15556 · arXiv
  55. Timothy Hospedales, Antreas Antoniou, Paul Micaelli, and Amos Storkey. 2021. Meta-learning in neural networks: A survey. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence 44, 9 (2021), 5149-5169.
  56. Edward J. Hu, Yelong Shen, Phillip Wallis, Zeyuan Allen-Zhu, Yuanzhi Li, Shean Wang, Lu Wang, and Weizhu Chen. 2022. Lora: Low-rank adaptation of large language models. arXiv:2106.09685. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/ 2106.09685 · arXiv
  57. Jie Huang and Kevin Chen-Chuan Chang. 2023. Towards reasoning in large language models: A survey. . arXiv:2212.10403. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2212.10403 · arXiv
  58. Jiaxin Huang, Shixiang Shane Gu, Le Hou, Yuexin Wu, Xuezhi Wang, Hongkun Yu, and Jiawei Han. 2023. Large language models can self-improve. arXiv:2210.11610. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2210.11610 · arXiv
  59. Lei Huang, Weijiang Yu, Weitao Ma, Weihong Zhong, Zhangyin Feng, Haotian Wang, Qianglong Chen, Weihua Peng, Xiaocheng Feng, et al. 2025. A survey on hallucination in large language models: Principles, taxonomy, challenges, and open questions. ACM Transaction on Information Systems 43, 2 (2025), 1-55.
  60. Wenlong Huang, Fei Xia, Ted Xiao, Harris Chan, Jacky Liang, Pete Florence, Andy Zeng, Jonathan Tompson, Igor Mordatch, Yevgen Chebotar, et al. 2022. Inner monologue: Embodied reasoning through planning with language models. arXiv:2207.05608. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2207.05608 · arXiv
  61. Zhen Huang, Haoyang Zou, Xuefeng Li, Yixiu Liu, Yuxiang Zheng, Ethan Chern, Shijie Xia, Yiwei Qin, Weizhe Yuan, and Pengfei Liu. 2024. O1 replication journey-part 2: Surpassing O1-preview through simple distillation, big progress or bitter lesson? arXiv:2411.16489. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2411.16489 · arXiv
  62. Mike Huisman, Jan N. Van Rijn, and Aske Plaat. 2021. A survey of deep meta-learning. Artificial Intelligence Review 54, 6 (2021), 4483-4541.
  63. Shima Imani, L. Du, and H. Shrivastava. 2023. Mathprompter: Mathematical reasoning using large language models. arXiv:2303.05398. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.05398 · arXiv
  64. Benoit Jacob, Skirmantas Kligys, Bo Chen, Menglong Zhu, Matthew Tang, Andrew Howard, Hartwig Adam, and Dmitry Kalenichenko. 2018. Quantization and training of neural networks for efficient integer-arithmetic-only inference. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. 2704-2713.
  65. Mingyu Jin, Qinkai Yu, Dong Shu, Haiyan Zhao,Wenyue Hua, Yanda Meng, Yongfeng Zhang, and Mengnan Du. 2024. The impact of reasoning step length on large language models. In Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2024, Lun-Wei Ku, Andre Martins, and Vivek Srikumar (Eds.). Association for Computational Linguistics, 1830-1842. https://aclanthology.org/2024.findings-acl.108/
  66. John Jumper, Richard Evans, Alexander Pritzel, Tim Green, Michael Figurnov, Olaf Ronneberger, Kathryn Tunyasuvu- nakool, Russ Bates, Augustin Žídek, Anna Potapenko, et al. 2021. Highly accurate protein structure prediction with AlphaFold. Nature 596, 7873 (2021), 583-589.
  67. Leslie Pack Kaelbling, Michael L. Littman, and Andrew W. Moore. 1996. Reinforcement learning: A survey. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 4 (1996), 237-285.
  68. Subbarao Kambhampati, Karthik Valmeekam, Lin Guan, Kaya Stechly, Mudit Verma, Siddhant Bhambri, Lucas Saldyt, and Anil Murthy. 2024. LLMs can't plan, but can help planning in LLM-modulo frameworks. arXiv:2402.01817. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2402.01817 · arXiv
  69. Ryo Kamoi, Yusen Zhang, Nan Zhang, Jiawei Han, and Rui Zhang. 2024. When can LLMs actually correct their own mistakes? A critical survey of self-correction of LLMs. Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics 12 (2024), 1417-1440.
  70. Jared Kaplan, Sam McCandlish, Tom Henighan, Tom B. Brown, Benjamin Chess, Rewon Child, Scott Gray, Alec Radford, Jeffrey Wu, and Dario Amodei. 2020. Scaling laws for neural language models. arXiv:2001.08361. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2001.08361 · arXiv
  71. Benjamin Kempinski, Ian Gemp, Kate Larson, Marc Lanctot, Yoram Bachrach, and Tal Kachman. 2025. Game of thoughts: Iterative reasoning in game-theoretic domains with large language models. In Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems. 1088-1097.
  72. Moo Jin Kim, Karl Pertsch, Siddharth Karamcheti, Ted Xiao, Ashwin Balakrishna, Suraj Nair, Rafael Rafailov, Ethan Fos- ter, Grace Lam, Pannag Sanketi, et al. 2024. Openvla: An open-source vision-language-action model. arXiv:2406.09246. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2406.09246 · arXiv
  73. Tom Kocmi, Rachel Bawden, Ondřej Bojar, Anton Dvorkovich, Christian Federmann, Mark Fishel, Thamme Gowda, Yvette Graham, Roman Grundkiewicz, Barry Haddow, et al. 2022. Findings of the 2022 conference on machine translation (WMT22). In Proceedings of the 7th Conference on Machine Translation (WMT). 1-45.
  74. Takeshi Kojima, Shixiang Shane Gu, Machel Reid, Yutaka Matsuo, and Yusuke Iwasawa. 2022. Large language models are zero-shot reasoners. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 35 (2022), 22199-22213.
  75. Rik Koncel-Kedziorski, Subhro Roy, Aida Amini, Nate Kushman, and Hannaneh Hajishirzi. 2016. MAWPS: A math word problem repository. In Proceedings of the 2016 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies. 1152-1157.
  76. Akshay Krishnamurthy, Keegan Harris, Dylan J. Foster, Cyril Zhang, and Aleksandrs Slivkins. 2024. Can large language models explore in-context? arXiv:2403.15371. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2403.15371 · arXiv
  77. Nathan Lambert, Jacob Morrison, Valentina Pyatkin, Shengyi Huang, Hamish Ivison, Faeze Brahman, Lester James V Miranda, Alisa Liu, Nouha Dziri, Shane Lyu, et al. 2024. Tulu 3: Pushing frontiers in open language model post-training. arXiv:2411.15124. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2411.15124 · arXiv
  78. Tamera Lanham, Anna Chen, Ansh Radhakrishnan, Benoit Steiner, Carson Denison, Danny Hernandez, Dustin Li, Esin Durmus, Evan Hubinger, Jackson Kernion, et al. 2023. Measuring faithfulness in chain-of-thought reasoning. arXiv:2307.13702. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2307.13702 · arXiv
  79. Yann LeCun, Yoshua Bengio, and Geoffrey Hinton. 2015. Deep learning. Nature 521, 7553 (2015), 436-444.
  80. Jonathan Lee, Annie Xie, Aldo Pacchiano, Yash Chandak, Chelsea Finn, Ofir Nachum, and Emma Brunskill. 2023. Supervised pretraining can learn in-context reinforcement learning. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 36 (2023), 43057-43083.
  81. Martha Lewis and Melanie Mitchell. 2024. Evaluating the robustness of analogical reasoning in large language models. arXiv:2411.14215. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2411.14215 · arXiv
  82. Jindong Li, Yali Fu, Li Fan, Jiahong Liu, Yao Shu, Chengwei Qin, Menglin Yang, Irwin King, and Rex Ying. 2025. Implicit reasoning in large language models: A comprehensive survey. arXiv:2509.02350. Retrieved from https: //arxiv.org/abs/2509.02350 · arXiv
  83. Lei Li, Yongfeng Zhang, and Li Chen. 2023. Prompt distillation for efficient LLM-based recommendation. In Proceedings of the 32nd ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management. 1348-1357.
  84. Shiyang Li, Jianshu Chen, Yelong Shen, Zhiyu Chen, Xinlu Zhang, Zekun Li, Hong Wang, Jing Qian, Baolin Peng, Yi Mao, et al. 2024. Explanations from large language models make small reasoners better. arXiv:2210.06726. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2210.06726 · arXiv
  85. Yifei Li, Zeqi Lin, Shizhuo Zhang, Qiang Fu, Bei Chen, Jian-Guang Lou, and Weizhu Chen. 2023. Making language models better reasoners with step-aware verifier. arXiv:2206.02336. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2206.02336 · arXiv
  86. Wang Ling, Dani Yogatama, Chris Dyer, and Phil Blunsom. 2017. Program induction by rationale generation: Learning to solve and explain algebraic word problems. arXiv:1705.04146. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/1705.04146 · arXiv
  87. Fei Liu, Tong Xialiang, Mingxuan Yuan, Xi Lin, Fu Luo, Zhenkun Wang, Zhichao Lu, and Qingfu Zhang. 2024. Evolution of heuristics: Towards efficient automatic algorithm design using large language model. In Proceedings of the 41st International Conference on Machine Learning.
  88. Hanmeng Liu, Ruoxi Ning, Zhiyang Teng, Jian Liu, Qiji Zhou, and Yue Zhang. 2023. Evaluating the logical reasoning ability of ChatGPT and GPT-4. arXiv:2304.03439. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2304.03439 · arXiv
  89. Pengfei Liu, Weizhe Yuan, Jinlan Fu, Zhengbao Jiang, Hiroaki Hayashi, and Graham Neubig. 2023. Pre-train, prompt, and predict: A systematic survey of prompting methods in natural language processing. ACM Computing Surveys 55, 9 (2023), 1-35.
  90. Linhao Luo, Yuan-Fang Li, Gholamreza Haffari, and Shirui Pan. 2024. Reasoning on graphs: Faithful and interpretable large language model reasoning. arXiv:2310.01061. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2310.01061 · arXiv
  91. 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:2301.13379. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2301.13379 · arXiv
  92. Aman Madaan, Niket Tandon, Prakhar Gupta, Skyler Hallinan, Luyu Gao, Sarah Wiegreffe, Uri Alon, Nouha Dziri, Shrimai Prabhumoye, Yiming Yang, et al. 2023. Self-refine: Iterative refinement with self-feedback. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 36 (2023).
  93. Lucie Charlotte Magister, Jonathan Mallinson, Jakub Adamek, Eric Malmi, and Aliaksei Severyn. 2023. Teaching small language models to reason. arXiv:2212.08410. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2212.08410 · arXiv
  94. Shen-Yun Miao, Chao-Chun Liang, and Keh-Yih Su. 2020. A diverse corpus for evaluating and developing english math word problem solvers. In Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics. Retrieved from https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:220047831
  95. Paulius Micikevicius, Sharan Narang, Jonah Alben, Gregory Diamos, Erich Elsen, David Garcia, Boris Ginsburg, Michael Houston, Oleksii Kuchaiev, Ganesh Venkatesh, et al. 2018. Mixed precision training. arXiv:1710.03740. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/1710.03740 · arXiv
  96. Shervin Minaee, Tomas Mikolov, Narjes Nikzad, Meysam Chenaghlu, Richard Socher, Xavier Amatriain, and Jianfeng Gao. 2024. Large language models: A survey. arXiv:2402.06196. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2402.06196 · arXiv
  97. Melanie Mitchell and Douglas R. Hofstadter. 1990. The emergence of understanding in a computer model of concepts and analogy-making. Physica D: Nonlinear Phenomena 42, 1-3 (1990), 322-334.
  98. Amir Moeini, Jiuqi Wang, Jacob Beck, Ethan Blaser, Shimon Whiteson, Rohan Chandra, and Shangtong Zhang. 2025. A survey of in-context reinforcement learning. arXiv:2502.07978. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2502.07978 · arXiv
  99. Philipp Mondorf and Barbara Plank. 2024. Beyond accuracy: Evaluating the reasoning behavior of large language models-A survey. arXiv:2404.01869. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2404.01869 · arXiv
  100. Niklas Muennighoff, Zitong Yang, Weijia Shi, Xiang Lisa Li, Li Fei-Fei, Hannaneh Hajishirzi, Luke Zettlemoyer, Percy Liang, Emmanuel Candès, and Tatsunori Hashimoto. 2025. s1: Simple test-time scaling. arXiv:2501.19393. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.19393 · arXiv
  101. Shashi Narayan, Shay B. Cohen, and Mirella Lapata. 2018. Don't give me the details, just the summary! topic-aware convolutional neural networks for extreme summarization. arXiv:1808.08745. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/ 1808.08745 · arXiv
  102. Allen Newell and Herbert A. Simon. 1961. Computer simulation of human thinking: A theory of problem solving expressed as a computer program permits simulation of thinking processes. Science 134, 3495 (1961), 2011-2017.
  103. Maxwell Nye, Anders Johan Andreassen, Guy Gur-Ari, Henryk Michalewski, Jacob Austin, David Bieber, David Dohan, Aitor Lewkowycz, Maarten Bosma, David Luan, et al. 2022. Show your work: Scratchpads for intermediate computation with language models. arXiv:2112.00114. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2112.00114 · arXiv
  104. Long Ouyang, Jeffrey Wu, Xu Jiang, Diogo Almeida, Carroll Wainwright, Pamela Mishkin, Chong Zhang, Sandhini Agarwal, Katarina Slama, Alex Ray, et al. 2022. Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 35 (2022), 27730-27744.
  105. Davide Paglieri, Bartłomiej Cupiał, Samuel Coward, Ulyana Piterbarg, Maciej Wolczyk, Akbir Khan, Eduardo Pignatelli, Łukasz Kuciński, Lerrel Pinto, Rob Fergus, et al. 2024. BALROG: Benchmarking agentic LLM and VLM reasoning on games. arXiv:2411.13543. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2411.13543 · arXiv
  106. Liangming Pan, Alon Albalak, Xinyi Wang, and William Yang Wang. 2023. Logic-LM: Empowering large language models with symbolic solvers for faithful logical reasoning. arXiv:2305.12295. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/ 2305.12295 · arXiv
  107. Denis Paperno, Germán Kruszewski, Angeliki Lazaridou, Quan Ngoc Pham, Raffaella Bernardi, Sandro Pezzelle, Marco Baroni, Gemma Boleda, and Raquel Fernández. 2016. The LAMBADA dataset: Word prediction requiring a broad discourse context. arXiv:1606.06031. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/1606.06031 · arXiv
  108. Kishore Papineni, Salim Roukos, Todd Ward, and Wei-Jing Zhu. 2002. Bleu: A method for automatic evaluation of machine translation. In Proceedings of the 40th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics. 311-318.
  109. Arkil Patel, S. Bhattamishra, and N. Goyal. 2021. Are NLP models really able to solve simple math word problems?. arXiv:2103.07191. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2103.07191 · arXiv
  110. Debjit Paul, Mete Ismayilzada, Maxime Peyrard, Beatriz Borges, Antoine Bosselut, Robert West, and Boi Faltings. 2024. Refiner: Reasoning feedback on intermediate representations. arXiv:2304.01904. Retrieved from https://arxiv. org/abs/2304.01904 · arXiv
  111. Debjit Paul, Robert West, Antoine Bosselut, and Boi Faltings. 2024. Making reasoning matter: Measuring and improving faithfulness of chain-of-thought reasoning. arXiv:2402.13950. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2402.13950 · arXiv
  112. Aske Plaat. 1996. Research, Re: Search & Re-search. Ph. D. Dissertation. Erasmus University Rotterdam.
  113. Aske Plaat. 2020. Learning to Play: Reinforcement Learning and Games. Springer Nature.
  114. Aske Plaat. 2022. Deep Reinforcement Learning. Springer, Singapore.
  115. Aske Plaat, Max van Duijn, Niki van Stein, Mike Preuss, Peter van der Putten, and Kees Joost Batenburg. 2025. Agentic large language models, a survey. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.23037 (2025). · arXiv
  116. Ofir Press, Muru Zhang, Sewon Min, Ludwig Schmidt, Noah A. Smith, and Mike Lewis. 2023. Measuring and narrowing the compositionality gap in language models. arXiv:2210.03350. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2210.03350 · arXiv
  117. Moschoula Pternea, Prerna Singh, Abir Chakraborty, Yagna Oruganti, Mirco Milletari, Sayli Bapat, and Kebei Jiang. 2024. The RL/LLM taxonomy tree: Reviewing synergies between reinforcement learning and large language models. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 80; arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.01874 (2024). · arXiv
  118. Alec Radford, Jeffrey Wu, Rewon Child, David Luan, Dario Amodei, and Ilya Sutskever. 2019. Language models are unsupervised multitask learners. OpenAI blog 1, 8 (2019), 9.
  119. Jack W. Rae, Sebastian Borgeaud, Trevor Cai, Katie Millican, Jordan Hoffmann, Francis Song, John Aslanides, Sarah Henderson, Roman Ring, Susannah Young, et al. 2021. Scaling language models: Methods, analysis & insights from training gopher. arXiv:2112.11446. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2112.11446 · arXiv
  120. Rafael Rafailov, Archit Sharma, Eric Mitchell, Christopher D. Manning, Stefano Ermon, and Chelsea Finn. 2024. Direct preference optimization: Your language model is secretly a reward model. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 36 (2024).
  121. Daking Rai, Yilun Zhou, Shi Feng, Abulhair Saparov, and Ziyu Yao. 2024. A practical review of mechanistic inter- pretability for transformer-based language models. arXiv:2407.02646. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2407.02646 · arXiv
  122. Pranav Rajpurkar, Jian Zhang, Konstantin Lopyrev, and Percy Liang. 2016. Squad: 100,000+ questions for machine comprehension of text. arXiv:1606.05250. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/1606.05250 · arXiv
  123. Bernardino Romera-Paredes, Mohammadamin Barekatain, Alexander Novikov, Matej Balog, M. Pawan Kumar, Emilien Dupont, Francisco J. R. Ruiz, Jordan S. Ellenberg, et al. 2024. Mathematical discoveries from program search with large language models. Nature 625, 7995 (2024), 468-475.
  124. Subhro Roy and Dan Roth. 2015. Solving general arithmetic word problems. arXiv:1608.01413. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/1608.01413 · arXiv
  125. Baptiste Roziere, Marie-Anne Lachaux, Lowik Chanussot, and Guillaume Lample. 2020. Unsupervised translation of programming languages. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 33 (2020), 20601-20611.
  126. Anian Ruoss, Fabio Pardo, Harris Chan, Bonnie Li, Volodymyr Mnih, and Tim Genewein. 2024. LMAct: A benchmark for in-context imitation learning with long multimodal demonstrations. arXiv:2412.01441. Retrieved from https: //arxiv.org/abs/2412.01441 · arXiv
  127. Omer Sagi and Lior Rokach. 2018. Ensemble learning: A survey. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery 8, 4 (2018), e1249.
  128. Pranab Sahoo, Ayush Kumar Singh, Sriparna Saha, Vinija Jain, Samrat Mondal, and Aman Chadha. 2024. A systematic survey of prompt engineering in large language models: Techniques and applications. arXiv:2402.07927. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2402.07927 · arXiv
  129. Abulhair Saparov and He He. 2023. Language models are greedy reasoners: A systematic formal analysis of chain-of- thought. arXiv:2210.01240. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2210.01240 · arXiv
  130. John Schultz, Jakub Adamek, Matej Jusup, Marc Lanctot, Michael Kaisers, Sarah Perrin, Daniel Hennes, Jeremy Shar, Cannada Lewis, Anian Ruoss, et al. 2024. Mastering board games by external and internal planning with language models. arXiv:2412.12119. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2412.12119 · arXiv
  131. Marwin Segler, M. Preuss, and M. Waller. 2018. Planning chemical syntheses with deep neural networks and symbolic AI. Nature 555, 7698 (2018), 604-610.
  132. Bilgehan Sel, Ahmad Al-Tawaha, Vanshaj Khattar, Ruoxi Jia, and Ming Jin. 2023. Algorithm of thoughts: Enhancing exploration of ideas in large language models. arXiv:2308.10379. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2308.10379 · arXiv
  133. Rico Sennrich, Barry Haddow, and Alexandra Birch. 2016. Improving neural machine translation models with monolingual data. arXiv:1511.06709. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/1511.06709 · arXiv
  134. Zhihong Shao, Peiyi Wang, Qihao Zhu, Runxin Xu, Junxiao Song, Xiao Bi, Haowei Zhang, Mingchuan Zhang, Y. K. Li, Y. Wu, et al. 2024. Deepseekmath: Pushing the limits of mathematical reasoning in open language models. arXiv:2402.03300. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2402.03300 · arXiv
  135. Jianhao Shen, Yichun Yin, Lin Li, Lifeng Shang, Xin Jiang, Ming Zhang, and Qun Liu. 2021. Generate & rank: A multi-task framework for math word problems. arXiv:2109.03034. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2109.03034 · arXiv
  136. Zhengliang Shi, Shen Gao, Xiuyi Chen, Yue Feng, Lingyong Yan, Haibo Shi, Dawei Yin, Zhumin Chen, Suzan Verberne, and Zhaochun Ren. 2024. Chain of tools: Large language model is an automatic multi-tool learner. arXiv:2405.16533. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2405.16533 · arXiv
  137. Zhengliang Shi, Shen Gao, Xiuyi Chen, Lingyong Yan, Haibo Shi, Dawei Yin, Zhumin Chen, Pengjie Ren, Suzan Verberne, and Zhaochun Ren. 2024. Learning to use tools via cooperative and interactive agents. arXiv:2403.03031. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2403.03031 · arXiv
  138. Noah Shinn, Federico Cassano, Ashwin Gopinath, Karthik Narasimhan, and Shunyu Yao. 2024. Reflexion: Language agents with verbal reinforcement learning. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 36 (2024).
  139. Mohit Shridhar, Lucas Manuelli, and Dieter Fox. 2022. Cliport: What and where pathways for robotic manipulation. In Proceedings of the Conference on Robot Learning. PMLR, 894-906.
  140. Mohit Shridhar, Xingdi Yuan, Marc-Alexandre Côté, Yonatan Bisk, Adam Trischler, and Matthew Hausknecht. 2021. ALFWorld: Aligning text and embodied environments for interactive learning. arXiv:2010.03768. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2010.03768 · arXiv
  141. David Silver, Julian Schrittwieser, Karen Simonyan, Ioannis Antonoglou, Aja Huang, Arthur Guez, Thomas Hubert, Lucas Baker, Matthew Lai, Adrian Bolton, et al. 2017. Mastering the game of go without human knowledge. Nature 550, 7676 (2017), 354-359.
  142. Aarohi Srivastava, Abhinav Rastogi, Abhishek Rao, Abu Awal Md Shoeb, Abubakar Abid, Adam Fisch, Adam R. Brown, Adam Santoro, Aditya Gupta, Adrià Garriga-Alonso, et al. 2022. Beyond the imitation game: Quantifying and extrapolating the capabilities of language models. arXiv:2206.04615. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2206.04615 · arXiv
  143. Richard S. Sutton. 1988. Learning to predict by the methods of temporal differences. Machine Learning 3 (1988), 9-44.
  144. Richard S. Sutton and Andrew G. Barto. 2018. Reinforcement Learning: An Introduction. MIT Press.
  145. Oyvind Tafjord, Bhavana Dalvi Mishra, and Peter Clark. 2020. ProofWriter: Generating implications, proofs, and abductive statements over natural language. arXiv:2012.13048. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2012.13048 · arXiv
  146. Alon Talmor, Jonathan Herzig, Nicholas Lourie, and Jonathan Berant. 2019. Commonsenseqa: A question answering challenge targeting commonsense knowledge. arXiv:1811.00937. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/1811.00937 · arXiv
  147. Yiming Tan, Dehai Min, Yu Li, Wenbo Li, Nan Hu, Yongrui Chen, and Guilin Qi. 2023. Can ChatGPT replace traditional KBQA models? An in-depth analysis of the question answering performance of the GPT LLM family. In Proceedings of the International Semantic Web Conference. Springer, 348-367.
  148. Yi Tay, Mostafa Dehghani, Vinh Q. Tran, Xavier Garcia, Jason Wei, Xuezhi Wang, Hyung Won Chung, Siamak Shakeri, Dara Bahri, Tal Schuster, et al. 2023. Ul2: Unifying language learning paradigms. arXiv:2205.05131. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2205.05131 · arXiv
  149. Gerald Tesauro. 1995. Temporal difference learning and TD-Gammon. Communications of the ACM 38, 3 (1995), 58-68.
  150. Romal Thoppilan, Daniel De Freitas, Jamie Hall, Noam Shazeer, Apoorv Kulshreshtha, Heng-Tze Cheng, Alicia Jin, Taylor Bos, Leslie Baker, Yu Du, et al. 2022. Lamda: Language models for dialog applications. arXiv:2201.08239. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2201.08239 · arXiv
  151. Jason Toy, Josh MacAdam, and Phil Tabor. 2024. Metacognition is all you need? Using introspection in generative agents to improve goal-directed behavior. arXiv:2401.10910. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2401.10910 · arXiv
  152. Miles Turpin, Julian Michael, Ethan Perez, and Samuel Bowman. 2024. Language models don't always say what they think: Unfaithful explanations in chain-of-thought prompting. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 36 (2024).
  153. Karthik Valmeekam, Matthew Marquez, Sarath Sreedharan, and Subbarao Kambhampati. 2023. On the planning abilities of large language models-a critical investigation. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 36 (2023), 75993-76005.
  154. Frank Van Harmelen, Vladimir Lifschitz, and Bruce Porter. 2008. Handbook of Knowledge Representation. Elsevier.
  155. Niki van Stein and Thomas Bäck. 2024. LLaMEA: A large language model evolutionary algorithm for automatically generating metaheuristics. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation; arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.20132 (2024). · arXiv
  156. Fien van Wetten, Aske Plaat, and Max van Duijn. 2025. Baba is LLM: Reasoning in a game with dynamic rules. arXiv:2506.19095. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.19095 · arXiv
  157. Ashish Vaswani, Noam Shazeer, Niki Parmar, Jakob Uszkoreit, Llion Jones, Aidan N. Gomez, Łukasz Kaiser, and Illia Polosukhin. 2017. Attention is all you need. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 30 (2017).
  158. Marcel V. J. Veenman, Bernadette HAM Van Hout-Wolters, and Peter Afflerbach. 2006. Metacognition and learning: Conceptual and methodological considerations. Metacognition and Learning 1 (2006), 3-14.
  159. Alex Wang, Yada Pruksachatkun, Nikita Nangia, Amanpreet Singh, Julian Michael, Felix Hill, Omer Levy, and Samuel Bowman. 2019. Superglue: A stickier benchmark for general-purpose language understanding systems. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32 (2019).
  160. Alex Wang, Amanpreet Singh, Julian Michael, Felix Hill, Omer Levy, and Samuel R. Bowman. 2018. GLUE: A multi-task benchmark and analysis platform for natural language understanding. arXiv:1804.07461. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/1804.07461 · arXiv
  161. Boshi Wang, Sewon Min, Xiang Deng, Jiaming Shen, You Wu, Luke Zettlemoyer, and Huan Sun. 2023. Towards understanding chain-of-thought prompting: An empirical study of what matters. arXiv:2212.10001. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2212.10001 · arXiv
  162. Guanzhi Wang, Yuqi Xie, Yunfan Jiang, Ajay Mandlekar, Chaowei Xiao, Yuke Zhu, Linxi Fan, and Anima Anandkumar. 2024. Voyager: An open-ended embodied agent with large language models. Transactions of Machine Learning Research; arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.16291 (2024). · arXiv
  163. Hui Wang, Michael Emmerich, Mike Preuss, and Aske Plaat. 2023. Analysis of hyper-parameters for alphazero-like deep reinforcement learning. International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making 22, 02 (2023), 829-853.
  164. Huaijie Wang, Shibo Hao, Hanze Dong, Shenao Zhang, Yilin Bao, Ziran Yang, and Yi Wu. 2024. Offline reinforcement learning for LLM multi-step reasoning. arXiv:2412.16145. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2412.16145 · arXiv
  165. Jiuqi Wang, Ethan Blaser, Hadi Daneshmand, and Shangtong Zhang. 2024. Transformers learn temporal difference methods for in-context reinforcement learning. arXiv:2405.13861. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2405.13861 · arXiv
  166. Xuezhi Wang, Jason Wei, Dale Schuurmans, Quoc Le, Ed Chi, Sharan Narang, Aakanksha Chowdhery, and Denny Zhou. 2023. Self-consistency improves chain of thought reasoning in language models. arXiv:2203.11171. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2203.11171 · arXiv
  167. Yuqing Wang and Yun Zhao. 2024. Metacognitive prompting improves understanding in large language models. arXiv:2308.05342. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2308.05342 · arXiv
  168. Jason Wei, Yi Tay, Rishi Bommasani, Colin Raffel, Barret Zoph, Sebastian Borgeaud, Dani Yogatama, Maarten Bosma, Denny Zhou, Donald Metzler, et al. 2022. Emergent abilities of large language models. Transactions of Machine Learning Research; arXiv preprint arXiv:2206.07682 (2022). · arXiv
  169. Jason Wei, Xuezhi Wang, Dale Schuurmans, Maarten Bosma, Fei Xia, Ed Chi, Quoc V. Le, and Denny Zhou. 2022. Chain-of-thought prompting elicits reasoning in large language models. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 35 (2022), 24824-24837.
  170. Sean Welleck, Ximing Lu, Peter West, Faeze Brahman, Tianxiao Shen, Daniel Khashabi, and Yejin Choi. 2023. Gener- ating sequences by learning to self-correct. arXiv:2211.00053. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2211.00053 · arXiv
  171. Pengcheng Wen, Jiaming Ji, Chi-Min Chan, Juntao Dai, Donghai Hong, Yaodong Yang, Sirui Han, and Yike Guo. 2025. Thinkpatterns-21k: A systematic study on the impact of thinking patterns in LLMs. arXiv:2503.12918. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.12918 · arXiv
  172. Yixuan Weng, Minjun Zhu, Fei Xia, Bin Li, Shizhu He, Shengping Liu, Bin Sun, Kang Liu, and Jun Zhao. 2023. Large language models are better reasoners with self-verification. arXiv:2212.09561. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/ 2212.09561 · arXiv
  173. Siwei Wu, Zhongyuan Peng, Xinrun Du, Tuney Zheng, Minghao Liu, Jialong Wu, Jiachen Ma, Yizhi Li, Jian Yang, Wangchunshu Zhou, et al. 2024. A comparative study on reasoning patterns of OpenAI's o1 model. arXiv:2410.13639. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.13639 · arXiv
  174. Zhaofeng Wu, Linlu Qiu, Alexis Ross, Ekin Akyürek, Boyuan Chen, Bailin Wang, Najoung Kim, Jacob Andreas, and Yoon Kim. 2024. Reasoning or reciting? Exploring the capabilities and limitations of language models through counterfactual tasks. In Proceedings of the 2024 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (Volume 1: Long Papers). 1819-1862.
  175. Yisheng Xiao, Lijun Wu, Junliang Guo, Juntao Li, Min Zhang, Tao Qin, and Tie-yan Liu. 2023. A survey on non- autoregressive generation for neural machine translation and beyond. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence (2023).
  176. Ziyang Xiao, Dongxiang Zhang, Yangjun Wu, Lilin Xu, Yuan Jessica Wang, Xiongwei Han, Xiaojin Fu, Tao Zhong, Jia Zeng, Mingli Song, et al. 2023. Chain-of-experts: When LLMs meet complex operations research problems. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Learning Representations.
  177. Yuxi Xie, Kenji Kawaguchi, Yiran Zhao, James Xu Zhao, Min-Yen Kan, Junxian He, and Michael Xie. 2024. Self- evaluation guided beam search for reasoning. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 36 (2024).
  178. Fengli Xu, Qianyue Hao, Zefang Zong, Jingwei Wang, Yunke Zhang, Jingyi Wang, Xiaochong Lan, Jiahui Gong, Tianjian Ouyang, Fanjin Meng, et al. 2025. Towards large reasoning models: A survey on scaling LLM reasoning capabilities. arXiv:2501.09686. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.09686 · arXiv
  179. Jundong Xu, Hao Fei, Liangming Pan, Qian Liu, Mong-Li Lee, and Wynne Hsu. 2024. Faithful logical reasoning via symbolic chain-of-thought. arXiv:2405.18357. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2405.18357 · arXiv
  180. Xiaohan Xu, Ming Li, Chongyang Tao, Tao Shen, Reynold Cheng, Jinyang Li, Can Xu, Dacheng Tao, and Tianyi Zhou. 2024. A survey on knowledge distillation of large language models. arXiv:2402.13116. Retrieved from https: //arxiv.org/abs/2402.13116 · arXiv
  181. Ling Yang, Zhaochen Yu, Tianjun Zhang, Shiyi Cao, Minkai Xu, Wentao Zhang, Joseph E. Gonzalez, and Bin Cui. 2024. Buffer of thoughts: Thought-augmented reasoning with large language models. arXiv:2406.04271. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2406.04271 · arXiv
  182. Shunyu Yao, Howard Chen, John Yang, and Karthik Narasimhan. 2022. Webshop: Towards scalable real-world web interaction with grounded language agents. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 35 (2022), 20744-20757.
  183. Shunyu Yao, Dian Yu, Jeffrey Zhao, Izhak Shafran, Tom Griffiths, Yuan Cao, and Karthik Narasimhan. 2024. Tree of thoughts: Deliberate problem solving with large language models. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 36 (2024).
  184. Shunyu Yao, Jeffrey Zhao, Dian Yu, Nan Du, Izhak Shafran, Karthik Narasimhan, and Yuan Cao. 2023. React: Synergizing reasoning and acting in language models. arXiv:2210.03629. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2210.03629 · arXiv
  185. Tao Yu, Rui Zhang, Kai Yang, Michihiro Yasunaga, Dongxu Wang, Zifan Li, James Ma, Irene Li, Qingning Yao, et al. 2018. Spider: A large-scale human-labeled dataset for complex and cross-domain semantic parsing and text-to-sql task. arXiv:1809.08887. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/1809.08887 · arXiv
  186. Eric Zelikman, Jesse Mu, Noah D. Goodman, and Yuhuai Tony Wu. 2022. Star: Self-taught reasoner bootstrapping reasoning with reasoning. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS) (2022).
  187. Yizhuo Zhang, Heng Wang, Shangbin Feng, Zhaoxuan Tan, Xiaochuang Han, Tianxing He, and Yulia Tsvetkov. 2024. Can LLM graph reasoning generalize beyond pattern memorization?arXiv:2406.15992. Retrieved from https: //arxiv.org/abs/2406.15992 · arXiv
  188. Zhuosheng Zhang, Aston Zhang, Mu Li, and Alex Smola. 2023. Automatic chain of thought prompting in large language models. arXiv:2210.03493. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2210.03493 · arXiv
  189. Wayne Xin Zhao, Kun Zhou, Junyi Li, Tianyi Tang, Xiaolei Wang, Yupeng Hou, Yingqian Min, Beichen Zhang, Junjie Zhang, Zican Dong, et al. 2023. A survey of large language models. arXiv:2303.18223. Retrieved from https: //arxiv.org/abs/2303.18223 · arXiv
  190. Chuanyang Zheng, Zhengying Liu, Enze Xie, Zhenguo Li, and Yu Li. 2023. Progressive-hint prompting improves reasoning in large language models. arXiv:2304.09797. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2304.09797 · arXiv
  191. Lianmin Zheng, Wei-Lin Chiang, Ying Sheng, Siyuan Zhuang, Zhanghao Wu, Yonghao Zhuang, Zi Lin, Zhuohan Li, Dacheng Li, Eric Xing, et al. 2024. Judging LLM-as-a-judge with MT-bench and chatbot arena. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 36 (2024).
  192. Wanjun Zhong, Siyuan Wang, Duyu Tang, Zenan Xu, Daya Guo, Yining Chen, Jiahai Wang, Jian Yin, Ming Zhou, and Nan Duan. 2022. Analytical reasoning of text. In Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: NAACL 2022. 2306-2319.
  193. Denny Zhou, Nathanael Schärli, Le Hou, Jason Wei, Nathan Scales, Xuezhi Wang, Dale Schuurmans, Claire Cui, Olivier Bousquet, Quoc Le, et al. 2023. Least-to-most prompting enables complex reasoning in large language models. arXiv:2205.10625. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2205.10625 · arXiv

Authors
Plaat, A., Wong, A., Verberne, S., Broekens, J., van Stein, N., & Back, T.
Affiliations
Leiden University (NL)
ORCID
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2024
Volume
58
Issue
6
Pages
1-35
ISSN
0360-0300 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.2407.11511
arXiv
2407.11511
OpenAlex
W4415915064
Cited by
52
References
8
Citations by year
2026: 35 · 2025: 17
FWCI
21.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • ACM Computing Surveys (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Leiden Repository (Leiden University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Leiden Repository (Leiden University) (submittedVersion)
  • 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
multi-step reasoning, large language models, chain-of-thought, in-context learning, few-shot learning, mathematical word problems, reasoning benchmarks, combinatorial games, logic reasoning, code generation, self-reflection

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