Short-Path Prompting in LLMs: Analyzing Reasoning Instability and Solutions for Robust Performance
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2504.09586v1
- Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2025 14:12:14 GMT
- Title: Short-Path Prompting in LLMs: Analyzing Reasoning Instability and Solutions for Robust Performance
- Authors: Zuoli Tang, Junjie Ou, Kaiqin Hu, Chunwei Wu, Zhaoxin Huan, Chilin Fu, Xiaolu Zhang, Jun Zhou, Chenliang Li,
- Abstract summary: Large language models' (LLMs) reasoning is largely due to the chain-of-thought (CoT) approaches.<n>LLMs are instruction-tuned to provide long and detailed CoT pathways when responding to reasoning-related questions.<n>Human beings are naturally cognitive misers and will prompt language models to give rather short responses.
- Score: 33.16322104912836
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
- Abstract: Recent years have witnessed significant progress in large language models' (LLMs) reasoning, which is largely due to the chain-of-thought (CoT) approaches, allowing models to generate intermediate reasoning steps before reaching the final answer. Building on these advances, state-of-the-art LLMs are instruction-tuned to provide long and detailed CoT pathways when responding to reasoning-related questions. However, human beings are naturally cognitive misers and will prompt language models to give rather short responses, thus raising a significant conflict with CoT reasoning. In this paper, we delve into how LLMs' reasoning performance changes when users provide short-path prompts. The results and analysis reveal that language models can reason effectively and robustly without explicit CoT prompts, while under short-path prompting, LLMs' reasoning ability drops significantly and becomes unstable, even on grade-school problems. To address this issue, we propose two approaches: an instruction-guided approach and a fine-tuning approach, both designed to effectively manage the conflict. Experimental results show that both methods achieve high accuracy, providing insights into the trade-off between instruction adherence and reasoning accuracy in current models.
Related papers
- Think Deep, Think Fast: Investigating Efficiency of Verifier-free Inference-time-scaling Methods [39.89239733570008]
This work conducts a comprehensive analysis of inference-time scaling methods for both reasoning and non-reasoning models.
We find that non-reasoning models, even with an extremely high inference budget, still fall substantially behind reasoning models.
For reasoning models, majority voting proves to be a robust inference strategy, generally competitive or outperforming other more sophisticated ITC methods.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-04-18T19:32:55Z) - Guiding Reasoning in Small Language Models with LLM Assistance [23.3038074903744]
Small Language Models cast doubt suitability for tasks demanding deep, multi-step logical deduction.
This paper introduces a framework called Small Reasons, Large Hints, which selectively augments SLM reasoning with targeted guidance from large language models.
Our experiments on mathematical reasoning datasets demonstrate that targeted external scaffolding significantly improves performance.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-04-14T06:32:45Z) - Stop Overthinking: A Survey on Efficient Reasoning for Large Language Models [54.04678363287392]
Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable capabilities in complex tasks.<n>Recent advancements in OpenAI o1 and DeepSeek-R1 have further improved performance in System-2 reasoning domains.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-03-20T17:59:38Z) - Critical-Questions-of-Thought: Steering LLM reasoning with Argumentative Querying [0.3659498819753633]
State-of-the-art Large Language models (LLMs) continue to struggle when performing logical and mathematical reasoning.<n>This paper makes use of the notion of critical questions from the literature on argumentation theory, focusing in particular on Toulmin's model of argumentation.<n>We show that employing these critical questions can improve the reasoning capabilities of LLMs.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-12-19T18:51:30Z) - Make LLMs better zero-shot reasoners: Structure-orientated autonomous reasoning [52.83539473110143]
We introduce a novel structure-oriented analysis method to help Large Language Models (LLMs) better understand a question.
To further improve the reliability in complex question-answering tasks, we propose a multi-agent reasoning system, Structure-oriented Autonomous Reasoning Agents (SARA)
Extensive experiments verify the effectiveness of the proposed reasoning system. Surprisingly, in some cases, the system even surpasses few-shot methods.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-10-18T05:30:33Z) - DynaThink: Fast or Slow? A Dynamic Decision-Making Framework for Large Language Models [42.95876831743256]
Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated emergent capabilities across diverse reasoning tasks via Chains-of-Thought prompting.
This paper addresses the challenge of enabling LLMs to autonomously select between fast and slow inference methods.
We introduce a dynamic decision-making framework that categorizes tasks into two distinct pathways: 'Fast', designated for tasks where the LLM quickly identifies a high-confidence solution, and 'Slow', allocated for tasks that the LLM perceives as complex.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-07-01T06:45:13Z) - Large Language Models as an Indirect Reasoner: Contrapositive and Contradiction for Automated Reasoning [74.90592233107712]
We propose a Direct-Indirect Reasoning (DIR) method, which considers Direct Reasoning (DR) and Indirect Reasoning (IR) as multiple parallel reasoning paths that are merged to derive the final answer.<n>Our DIR method is simple yet effective and can be straightforwardly integrated with existing variants of CoT methods.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-02-06T03:41:12Z) - LaRS: Latent Reasoning Skills for Chain-of-Thought Reasoning [61.7853049843921]
Chain-of-thought (CoT) prompting is a popular in-context learning approach for large language models (LLMs)
This paper introduces a new approach named Latent Reasoning Skills (LaRS) that employs unsupervised learning to create a latent space representation of rationales.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-12-07T20:36:10Z) - From Heuristic to Analytic: Cognitively Motivated Strategies for
Coherent Physical Commonsense Reasoning [66.98861219674039]
Heuristic-Analytic Reasoning (HAR) strategies drastically improve the coherence of rationalizations for model decisions.
Our findings suggest that human-like reasoning strategies can effectively improve the coherence and reliability of PLM reasoning.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-10-24T19:46:04Z) - Concise and Organized Perception Facilitates Reasoning in Large Language Models [31.238220405009617]
Exploiting large language models (LLMs) to tackle reasoning has garnered growing attention.<n>It still remains highly challenging to achieve satisfactory results in complex logical problems, characterized by plenty of premises within the context and requiring multi-hop reasoning.<n>In this work, we first examine the mechanism from the perspective of information flow and reveal that LLMs confront difficulties akin to human-like cognitive biases when dealing with disordered and irrelevant content in reasoning tasks.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-10-05T04:47:49Z) - Re-Reading Improves Reasoning in Large Language Models [87.46256176508376]
We introduce a simple, yet general and effective prompting method, Re2, to enhance the reasoning capabilities of off-the-shelf Large Language Models (LLMs)
Unlike most thought-eliciting prompting methods, such as Chain-of-Thought (CoT), Re2 shifts the focus to the input by processing questions twice, thereby enhancing the understanding process.
We evaluate Re2 on extensive reasoning benchmarks across 14 datasets, spanning 112 experiments, to validate its effectiveness and generality.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-09-12T14:36:23Z) - Question Decomposition Improves the Faithfulness of Model-Generated
Reasoning [23.34325378824462]
Large language models (LLMs) are difficult to verify the correctness and safety of their behavior.
One approach is to prompt LLMs to externalize their reasoning, by having them generate step-by-step reasoning as they answer a question.
This approach relies on the stated reasoning faithfully reflecting the model's actual reasoning, which is not always the case.
Decomposition-based methods achieve strong performance on question-answering tasks, sometimes approaching that of CoT.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-07-17T00:54:10Z) - Enhancing Chain-of-Thoughts Prompting with Iterative Bootstrapping in Large Language Models [81.01397924280612]
Large language models (LLMs) can achieve highly effective performance on various reasoning tasks by incorporating step-by-step chain-of-thought (CoT) prompting as demonstrations.
We introduce Iter-CoT (Iterative bootstrapping in Chain-of-Thoughts Prompting), an iterative bootstrapping approach for selecting exemplars and generating reasoning chains.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-04-23T13:54:39Z) - Shortcut Learning of Large Language Models in Natural Language
Understanding [119.45683008451698]
Large language models (LLMs) have achieved state-of-the-art performance on a series of natural language understanding tasks.
They might rely on dataset bias and artifacts as shortcuts for prediction.
This has significantly affected their generalizability and adversarial robustness.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-08-25T03:51:39Z)
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.