Pith. sign in

REVIEW 8 cited by

Towards Understanding Chain-of-Thought Prompting: An Empirical Study of What Matters

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2212.10001 v2 pith:VXIL36EM submitted 2022-12-20 cs.CL

Towards Understanding Chain-of-Thought Prompting: An Empirical Study of What Matters

classification cs.CL
keywords reasoningpromptingstepsunderstandingaspectschain-of-thoughtdemonstrationseffective
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting can dramatically improve the multi-step reasoning abilities of large language models (LLMs). CoT explicitly encourages the LLM to generate intermediate rationales for solving a problem, by providing a series of reasoning steps in the demonstrations. Despite its success, there is still little understanding of what makes CoT prompting effective and which aspects of the demonstrated reasoning steps contribute to its performance. In this paper, we show that CoT reasoning is possible even with invalid demonstrations - prompting with invalid reasoning steps can achieve over 80-90% of the performance obtained using CoT under various metrics, while still generating coherent lines of reasoning during inference. Further experiments show that other aspects of the rationales, such as being relevant to the query and correctly ordering the reasoning steps, are much more important for effective CoT reasoning. Overall, these findings both deepen our understanding of CoT prompting, and open up new questions regarding LLMs' capability to learn to reason in context.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 8 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. DICE: Entropy-Regularized Equilibrium Selection for Stable Multi-Agent LLM Coordination

    cs.LG 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    DICE formalizes multi-agent LLM coordination as discounted incomplete-information Markov games and introduces Heterogeneous Quantal Response Equilibrium (HQRE) to achieve unique stable equilibria with bounded regret, ...

  2. Training Large Language Models to Reason in a Continuous Latent Space

    cs.CL 2024-12 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Coconut lets LLMs perform reasoning directly in continuous latent space by recycling hidden states as inputs, outperforming standard chain-of-thought on search-intensive logical tasks with better accuracy-efficiency t...

  3. GenoMAS: A Multi-Agent Framework for Scientific Discovery via Code-Driven Gene Expression Analysis

    cs.AI 2025-07 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    GenoMAS deploys six specialized LLM agents with guided planning to preprocess transcriptomic data and identify genes, reaching 89.13% composite similarity and 60.48% F1 on the GenoTEX benchmark while outperforming pri...

  4. Towards an AI co-scientist

    cs.AI 2025-02 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    A multi-agent AI system generates novel biomedical hypotheses that show promising experimental validation in drug repurposing for leukemia, new targets for liver fibrosis, and a bacterial gene transfer mechanism.

  5. Training Language Models to Self-Correct via Reinforcement Learning

    cs.LG 2024-09 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    SCoRe uses multi-turn online RL with regularization on self-generated traces to improve LLM self-correction, achieving 15.6% and 9.1% gains on MATH and HumanEval for Gemini models.

  6. RLAIF vs. RLHF: Scaling Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback with AI Feedback

    cs.CL 2023-09 conditional novelty 6.0

    RLAIF matches RLHF on summarization and dialogue tasks, with a direct-RLAIF variant achieving superior results by using LLM rewards directly during training.

  7. Towards Expert-Level Medical Question Answering with Large Language Models

    cs.CL 2023-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Med-PaLM 2 achieves 86.5% accuracy on MedQA and approaches or exceeds prior state-of-the-art on other medical QA benchmarks while receiving higher physician preference ratings than human answers on consumer questions.

  8. NoisyCoconut: Counterfactual Consensus via Latent Space Reasoning

    cs.LG 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Injecting noise into LLM latent trajectories creates diverse reasoning paths whose agreement acts as a confidence signal for selective abstention, cutting error rates from 40-70% to under 15% on math tasks.