Error Reflection Prompting: Can Large Language Models Successfully Understand Errors?

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2508.16729v1
• Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2025 18:02:36 GMT
• Title: Error Reflection Prompting: Can Large Language Models Successfully Understand Errors?
• Authors: Jason Li, Lauren Yraola, Kevin Zhu, Sean O'Brien,
• Abstract summary: Chain-of-thought (CoT) methods aim to equip models with a better understanding of the correct procedures for addressing a given task.<n>We propose Error Reflection Prompting (ERP) to further enhance reasoning in language models.
• Score: 8.4909975287531
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Prompting methods for language models, such as Chain-of-thought (CoT), present intuitive step-by-step processes for problem solving. These methodologies aim to equip models with a better understanding of the correct procedures for addressing a given task. Despite these advancements, CoT lacks the ability of reflection and error correction, potentially causing a model to perpetuate mistakes and errors. Therefore, inspired by the human ability for said tasks, we propose Error Reflection Prompting (ERP) to further enhance reasoning in language models. Building upon CoT, ERP is a method comprised of an incorrect answer, error recognition, and a correct answer. This process enables the model to recognize types of errors and the steps that lead to incorrect answers, allowing the model to better discern which steps to avoid and which to take. The model is able to generate the error outlines itself with automated ERP generation, allowing for error recognition and correction to be integrated into the reasoning chain and produce scalability and reliability in the process. The results demonstrate that ERP serves as a versatile supplement to conventional CoT, ultimately contributing to more robust and capable reasoning abilities along with increased interpretability in how models ultimately reach their errors.

Related papers

• Beyond Output Critique: Self-Correction via Task Distillation [36.44752912823049]
  We propose a framework that introduces an intermediate step of task abstraction before solution refinement.<n>Given an input and an initial response, the model first distills the task into a structured template that captures key variables, constraints, and problem structure.<n>This abstraction then guides solution instantiation, grounding subsequent responses in a clearer understanding of the task.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-31T19:15:41Z)
• InT: Self-Proposed Interventions Enable Credit Assignment in LLM Reasoning [32.274434679047395]
  Outcome-reward reinforcement learning (RL) has proven effective at improving the reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs)<n>Standard RL assigns credit only at the level of the final answer, penalizing entire reasoning traces when the outcome is incorrect.<n>We introduce Intervention Training (InT), a training paradigm in which the model performs fine-grained credit assignment on its own reasoning traces.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-20T18:15:38Z)
• Synthetic Error Injection Fails to Elicit Self-Correction In Language Models [14.76894432271754]
  We investigate whether supervised learning with synthetic error injection can induce self-correction abilities in language models.<n>Our approach inserts artificial errors into reasoning chains, masks them, and supervises the model to recognize and correct these mistakes.<n>Our results help explain why on-policy reinforcement learning methods have proven uniquely effective for eliciting self-correction.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-02T03:57:49Z)
• From Denoising to Refining: A Corrective Framework for Vision-Language Diffusion Model [72.73512218682187]
  We introduce ReDiff, a refining-enhanced diffusion framework that teaches the model to identify and correct its own errors.<n>Our approach features a two-stage training process: first, we instill a foundational revision capability by training the model to revise synthetic errors; second, we implement a novel online self-correction loop.<n>This mistake-driven learning endows the model with the crucial ability to revisit and refine its already generated output, effectively breaking the error cascade.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-22T06:58:55Z)
• Language Models can perform Single-Utterance Self-Correction of Perturbed Reasoning [4.768151813962547]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive mathematical reasoning capabilities.<n>Their performance remains brittle to minor variations in problem description and prompting strategy.<n>To better understand self-correction capabilities of recent models, we conduct experiments measuring models' ability to self-correct synthetics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-18T21:35:44Z)
• EULER: Enhancing the Reasoning Ability of Large Language Models through Error-Induced Learning [66.82956219777763]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated strong reasoning capabilities.<n>Error-IndUced LEaRning (EULER) model aims to develop an error exposure model that generates high-quality solution errors.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-28T08:57:03Z)
• LEMMA: Learning from Errors for MatheMatical Advancement in LLMs [33.571479131705075]
  We introduce Learning from Errors for Mathematical Advancement (LEMMA) to enhance large language models' reasoning ability.<n> LEMMA constructs data consisting of an incorrect solution with an erroneous step and a reflection connection to a correct solution for fine-tuning.<n> Experimental results demonstrate that LEMMA achieves significant performance improvements over other strong baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-21T17:59:10Z)
• Self-Corrective Task Planning by Inverse Prompting with Large Language Models [9.283971287618261]
  We introduce InversePrompt, a novel self-corrective task planning approach.<n>Our method incorporates reasoning steps to provide clear, interpretable feedback.<n>Results on benchmark datasets show an average 16.3% higher success rate over existing LLM-based task planning methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-10T13:35:51Z)
• ProcessBench: Identifying Process Errors in Mathematical Reasoning [62.80402845414901]
  We introduce ProcessBench for measuring the ability to identify erroneous steps in mathematical reasoning.<n>ProcessBench consists of 3,400 test cases, primarily focused on competition- and Olympiad-level math problems.<n>We conduct extensive evaluation on ProcessBench, involving two types of models: process reward models (PRMs) and critic models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-09T15:11:40Z)
• Subtle Errors in Reasoning: Preference Learning via Error-injected Self-editing [59.405145971637204]
  We propose a novel preference learning framework called eRror-Injected Self-Editing (RISE)<n>RISE injects predefined subtle errors into pivotal tokens in reasoning or steps to construct hard pairs for error mitigation.<n>Experiments validate the effectiveness of RISE, with preference learning on Qwen2-7B-Instruct yielding notable improvements of 3.0% on GSM8K and 7.9% on MATH with only 4.5K training samples.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-09T07:43:38Z)
• Training Language Models to Self-Correct via Reinforcement Learning [98.35197671595343]
  Self-correction has been found to be largely ineffective in modern large language models (LLMs) We develop a multi-turn online reinforcement learning approach, SCoRe, that significantly improves an LLM's self-correction ability using entirely self-generated data. We find that SCoRe achieves state-of-the-art self-correction performance, improving the base models' self-correction by 15.6% and 9.1% respectively on MATH and HumanEval.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-19T17:16:21Z)
• Tuning-Free Accountable Intervention for LLM Deployment -- A Metacognitive Approach [55.613461060997004]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have catalyzed transformative advances across a spectrum of natural language processing tasks. We propose an innovative textitmetacognitive approach, dubbed textbfCLEAR, to equip LLMs with capabilities for self-aware error identification and correction.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-08T19:18:53Z)
• Understanding and Mitigating Classification Errors Through Interpretable Token Patterns [58.91023283103762]
  Characterizing errors in easily interpretable terms gives insight into whether a classifier is prone to making systematic errors. We propose to discover those patterns of tokens that distinguish correct and erroneous predictions. We show that our method, Premise, performs well in practice.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-18T00:24:26Z)
• You Can Generate It Again: Data-to-Text Generation with Verification and Correction Prompting [24.738004421537926]
  Small language models like T5 excel in generating high-quality text for data-to-text tasks.<n>They frequently miss keywords, which is considered one of the most severe and common errors in this task.<n>We explore the potential of using feedback systems to enhance semantic fidelity in smaller language models for data-to-text generation tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-28T05:34:25Z)
• Sufficiently Accurate Model Learning for Planning [119.80502738709937]
  This paper introduces the constrained Sufficiently Accurate model learning approach. It provides examples of such problems, and presents a theorem on how close some approximate solutions can be. The approximate solution quality will depend on the function parameterization, loss and constraint function smoothness, and the number of samples in model learning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-02-11T16:27:31Z)

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.