Can LLMs Correct Themselves? A Benchmark of Self-Correction in LLMs

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2510.16062v2
• Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2025 09:04:12 GMT
• Title: Can LLMs Correct Themselves? A Benchmark of Self-Correction in LLMs
• Authors: Guiyao Tie, Zenghui Yuan, Zeli Zhao, Chaoran Hu, Tianhe Gu, Ruihang Zhang, Sizhe Zhang, Junran Wu, Xiaoyue Tu, Ming Jin, Qingsong Wen, Lixing Chen, Pan Zhou, Lichao Sun,
• Abstract summary: Self-correction of large language models (LLMs) emerges as a critical component for enhancing their reasoning performance.<n>This study introduces CorrectBench, a benchmark developed to evaluate the effectiveness of self-correction strategies.<n>Our findings reveal that: 1) Self-correction methods can improve accuracy, especially for complex reasoning tasks; 2) Mixing different self-correction strategies yields further improvements, though it reduces efficiency; and 3) Reasoning LLMs (e.g., DeepSeek-R1) have limited optimization under additional self-correction methods and have high time costs.
• Score: 57.10533368622962
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Self-correction of large language models (LLMs) emerges as a critical component for enhancing their reasoning performance. Although various self-correction methods have been proposed, a comprehensive evaluation of these methods remains largely unexplored, and the question of whether LLMs can truly correct themselves is a matter of significant interest and concern. In this study, we introduce CorrectBench, a benchmark developed to evaluate the effectiveness of self-correction strategies, including intrinsic, external, and fine-tuned approaches, across three tasks: commonsense reasoning, mathematical reasoning, and code generation. Our findings reveal that: 1) Self-correction methods can improve accuracy, especially for complex reasoning tasks; 2) Mixing different self-correction strategies yields further improvements, though it reduces efficiency; 3) Reasoning LLMs (e.g., DeepSeek-R1) have limited optimization under additional self-correction methods and have high time costs. Interestingly, a comparatively simple chain-of-thought (CoT) baseline demonstrates competitive accuracy and efficiency. These results underscore the potential of self-correction to enhance LLM's reasoning performance while highlighting the ongoing challenge of improving their efficiency. Consequently, we advocate for further research focused on optimizing the balance between reasoning capabilities and operational efficiency. Project Page: https://correctbench.github.io/

Related papers

• From Solving to Verifying: A Unified Objective for Robust Reasoning in LLMs [13.024616714540999]
  We propose GRPO-Verif, an algorithm that jointly optimize solution generation and self-verification within a unified loss function.<n> Experimental results demonstrate that our method enhances self-verification capability while maintaining comparable performance in reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-19T05:27:06Z)
• Verifying Large Language Models' Reasoning Paths via Correlation Matrix Rank [71.09032766271493]
  Large language models (LLMs) are prone to errors and hallucinations.<n>How to check their outputs effectively and efficiently has become a critical problem in their applications.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-28T11:01:10Z)
• ReVISE: Learning to Refine at Test-Time via Intrinsic Self-Verification [53.80183105328448]
  Refine via Intrinsic Self-Verification (ReVISE) is an efficient framework that enables LLMs to self-correct their outputs through self-verification.<n>Our experiments on various reasoning tasks demonstrate that ReVISE achieves efficient self-correction and significantly improves reasoning performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-20T13:50:02Z)
• S$^2$R: Teaching LLMs to Self-verify and Self-correct via Reinforcement Learning [51.84977135926156]
  We introduce S$2$R, an efficient framework that enhances LLM reasoning by teaching models to self-verify and self-correct during inference.<n>Our results demonstrate that Qwen2.5-math-7B achieves an accuracy improvement from 51.0% to 81.6%, outperforming models trained on an equivalent amount of long-CoT distilled data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-18T13:40:22Z)
• Teaching LLMs According to Their Aptitude: Adaptive Reasoning for Mathematical Problem Solving [55.895917967408586]
  Existing approaches to mathematical reasoning with large language models rely on Chain-of-Thought (CoT) for generalizability or Tool-Integrated Reasoning (TIR) for precise computation.<n>We propose TATA (Teaching LLMs According to Their Aptitude), an adaptive framework that enables LLMs to personalize their reasoning strategy spontaneously.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-17T16:56:23Z)
• Forest-of-Thought: Scaling Test-Time Compute for Enhancing LLM Reasoning [40.069109287947875]
  We propose a novel reasoning framework called Forest-of-Thought (FoT)<n>FoT integrates multiple reasoning trees to leverage collective decision-making for solving complex logical problems.<n>FoT employs sparse activation strategies to select the most relevant reasoning paths, improving both efficiency and accuracy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-12T09:01:18Z)
• Improving LLM Reasoning through Scaling Inference Computation with Collaborative Verification [52.095460362197336]
  Large language models (LLMs) struggle with consistent and accurate reasoning. LLMs are trained primarily on correct solutions, reducing their ability to detect and learn from errors. We propose a novel collaborative method integrating Chain-of-Thought (CoT) and Program-of-Thought (PoT) solutions for verification.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-05T05:21:48Z)
• S^3cMath: Spontaneous Step-level Self-correction Makes Large Language Models Better Mathematical Reasoners [23.713779973116733]
  Self-correction is a method that can stimulate the potential reasoning abilities of large language models (LLMs)<n>We propose S$3$c-Math, which are able to perform Spontaneous Step-level Self-correction for Mathematical reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-03T01:40:21Z)

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.