Chain of Thought Still Thinks Fast: APriCoT Helps with Thinking Slow

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2408.08651v3
• Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2025 16:13:08 GMT
• Title: Chain of Thought Still Thinks Fast: APriCoT Helps with Thinking Slow
• Authors: Kyle Moore, Jesse Roberts, Thao Pham, Douglas Fisher,
• Abstract summary: We introduce Counterfactual Prompting with Agnostically Primed CoT (APriCoT)<n>APriCoT effectively reduces the influence of base-rate probabilities while improving overall accuracy.<n>Our results suggest that mitigating bias requires a slow thinking process which CoT alone may not provide.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Language models are known to absorb biases from their training data, leading to predictions driven by statistical regularities rather than semantic relevance. We investigate the impact of these biases on answer choice preferences in the Massive Multi-Task Language Understanding (MMLU) task. Our findings show that these biases are predictive of model preference and mirror human test-taking strategies even when chain of thought (CoT) reasoning is used. To address this issue, we introduce Counterfactual Prompting with Agnostically Primed CoT (APriCoT). We demonstrate that while Counterfactual Prompting with CoT alone is insufficient to mitigate bias, APriCoT effectively reduces the influence of base-rate probabilities while improving overall accuracy. Our results suggest that mitigating bias requires a slow thinking process which CoT alone may not provide as it tends to reinforce fast thinking model bias under some prompting methodologies. APriCoT is a step toward developing more robust and fair language models that can think slow.

Related papers

• Decoding Answers Before Chain-of-Thought: Evidence from Pre-CoT Probes and Activation Steering [5.427346259545067]
  Chain-of-thought (CoT) has become central to scaling reasoning capabilities in large language models.<n>We show that instruction-tuned models often determine their answer before generating CoT.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-02T04:33:55Z)
• Can Confidence Estimates Decide When Chain-of-Thought Is Necessary for LLMs? [32.02698064940949]
  Chain-of-thought (CoT) prompting has emerged as a common technique for enhancing the reasoning abilities of large language models.<n>We present the first systematic study of training-free confidence estimation methods for CoT gating.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-23T21:33:28Z)
• Thinking Before You Speak: A Proactive Test-time Scaling Approach [54.8205006555199]
  We implement our idea as a reasoning framework, named emphThinking Before You Speak (TBYS)<n>We design a pipeline for automatically collecting and filtering in-context examples for the generation of emphinsights.<n>Experiments on challenging mathematical datasets verify the effectiveness of TBYS.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-26T03:43:32Z)
• Unveiling Confirmation Bias in Chain-of-Thought Reasoning [12.150655660758359]
  Chain-of-thought (CoT) prompting has been widely adopted to enhance the reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs)<n>This work presents a novel perspective to understand CoT behavior through the lens of textitconfirmation bias in cognitive psychology.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-14T01:30:17Z)
• Prompting Science Report 2: The Decreasing Value of Chain of Thought in Prompting [0.0]
  Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting is a technique that encourages a large language model to "think step by step"<n>The effectiveness of CoT prompting can vary greatly depending on the type of task and model.<n>For models designed with explicit reasoning capabilities, CoT prompting often results in only marginal, if any, gains in answer accuracy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-08T13:41:25Z)
• Does Thinking More always Help? Mirage of Test-Time Scaling in Reasoning Models [130.5487886246353]
  Extending thinking traces using prompts like "Wait" or "Let me rethink" can improve performance.<n>This raises a natural question: Does thinking more at test-time truly lead to better reasoning?<n>We show a consistent pattern of initial performance improvements from additional thinking followed by a decline, due to "overthinking"
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-04T17:55:09Z)
• A Closer Look at Bias and Chain-of-Thought Faithfulness of Large (Vision) Language Models [53.18562650350898]
  Chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning enhances performance of large language models.<n>We present the first comprehensive study of CoT faithfulness in large vision-language models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-29T18:55:05Z)
• When More is Less: Understanding Chain-of-Thought Length in LLMs [51.631483479081645]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) employ Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning to deconstruct complex problems.<n>This paper argues that longer CoTs are often presumed superior, arguing that longer is not always better.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-11T05:28:59Z)
• Unveiling the Statistical Foundations of Chain-of-Thought Prompting Methods [59.779795063072655]
  Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting and its variants have gained popularity as effective methods for solving multi-step reasoning problems. We analyze CoT prompting from a statistical estimation perspective, providing a comprehensive characterization of its sample complexity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-25T04:07:18Z)
• Enhancing Chain of Thought Prompting in Large Language Models via Reasoning Patterns [26.641713417293538]
  Chain of Thought (CoT) prompting can encourage language models to engage in logical reasoning. We propose leveraging reasoning patterns to enhance CoT prompting effectiveness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-23T07:50:00Z)
• Projective Methods for Mitigating Gender Bias in Pre-trained Language Models [10.418595661963062]
  Projective methods are fast to implement, use a small number of saved parameters, and make no updates to the existing model parameters. We find that projective methods can be effective at both intrinsic bias and downstream bias mitigation, but that the two outcomes are not necessarily correlated.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-27T17:49:31Z)
• Take Care of Your Prompt Bias! Investigating and Mitigating Prompt Bias in Factual Knowledge Extraction [56.17020601803071]
  Recent research shows that pre-trained language models (PLMs) suffer from "prompt bias" in factual knowledge extraction. This paper aims to improve the reliability of existing benchmarks by thoroughly investigating and mitigating prompt bias.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-15T02:04:35Z)
• Prototype-based Aleatoric Uncertainty Quantification for Cross-modal Retrieval [139.21955930418815]
  Cross-modal Retrieval methods build similarity relations between vision and language modalities by jointly learning a common representation space. However, the predictions are often unreliable due to the Aleatoric uncertainty, which is induced by low-quality data, e.g., corrupt images, fast-paced videos, and non-detailed texts. We propose a novel Prototype-based Aleatoric Uncertainty Quantification (PAU) framework to provide trustworthy predictions by quantifying the uncertainty arisen from the inherent data ambiguity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-29T09:41:19Z)
• HANS, are you clever? Clever Hans Effect Analysis of Neural Systems [1.6267479602370545]
  Large Language Models (It-LLMs) have been exhibiting outstanding abilities to reason around cognitive states, intentions, and reactions of all people involved, letting humans guide and comprehend day-to-day social interactions effectively. Several multiple-choice questions (MCQ) benchmarks have been proposed to construct solid assessments of the models' abilities. However, earlier works are demonstrating the presence of inherent "order bias" in It-LLMs, posing challenges to the appropriate evaluation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-21T20:52:18Z)
• Measuring Faithfulness in Chain-of-Thought Reasoning [19.074147845029355]
  Large language models (LLMs) perform better when they produce step-by-step, "Chain-of-Thought" (CoT) reasoning before answering a question. It is unclear if the stated reasoning is a faithful explanation of the model's actual reasoning (i.e., its process for answering the question) We investigate hypotheses for how CoT reasoning may be unfaithful, by examining how the model predictions change when we intervene on the CoT.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-17T01:08:39Z)
• When Does Confidence-Based Cascade Deferral Suffice? [69.28314307469381]
  Cascades are a classical strategy to enable inference cost to vary adaptively across samples. A deferral rule determines whether to invoke the next classifier in the sequence, or to terminate prediction. Despite being oblivious to the structure of the cascade, confidence-based deferral often works remarkably well in practice.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-06T04:13:57Z)
• CTC-based Non-autoregressive Speech Translation [51.37920141751813]
  We investigate the potential of connectionist temporal classification for non-autoregressive speech translation. We develop a model consisting of two encoders that are guided by CTC to predict the source and target texts. Experiments on the MuST-C benchmarks show that our NAST model achieves an average BLEU score of 29.5 with a speed-up of 5.67$times$.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-27T03:54:09Z)
• Fairness-guided Few-shot Prompting for Large Language Models [93.05624064699965]
  In-context learning can suffer from high instability due to variations in training examples, example order, and prompt formats. We introduce a metric to evaluate the predictive bias of a fixed prompt against labels or a given attributes. We propose a novel search strategy based on the greedy search to identify the near-optimal prompt for improving the performance of in-context learning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-23T12:28:25Z)
• Delving into Identify-Emphasize Paradigm for Combating Unknown Bias [52.76758938921129]
  We propose an effective bias-conflicting scoring method (ECS) to boost the identification accuracy. We also propose gradient alignment (GA) to balance the contributions of the mined bias-aligned and bias-conflicting samples. Experiments are conducted on multiple datasets in various settings, demonstrating that the proposed solution can mitigate the impact of unknown biases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-22T14:50:24Z)
• ADEPT: A DEbiasing PrompT Framework [49.582497203415855]
  Finetuning is an applicable approach for debiasing contextualized word embeddings. discrete prompts with semantic meanings have shown to be effective in debiasing tasks. We propose ADEPT, a method to debias PLMs using prompt tuning while maintaining the delicate balance between removing biases and ensuring representation ability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-10T08:41:40Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.