Evaluating Prompting and Execution-Based Methods for Deterministic Computation in LLMs

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.03227v2
• Date: Thu, 07 May 2026 05:34:14 GMT
• Title: Evaluating Prompting and Execution-Based Methods for Deterministic Computation in LLMs
• Abstract summary: Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated strong capabilities in natural language understanding and reasoning.<n>We systematically evaluate multiple prompting strategies, including Chain-of-Thought (CoT), Least-to-Most decomposition, Program-of-Thought (PoT), and Self-Consistency (SC)<n>Our results show that standard prompting methods achieve only moderate accuracy on sequence-based tasks.
• Score: 1.2957535240267326
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated strong capabilities in natural language understanding and reasoning. However, their ability to perform exact, deterministic computation remains unclear. In this work, we systematically evaluate multiple prompting strategies, including Chain-of-Thought (CoT), Least-to-Most decomposition, Program-of-Thought (PoT), and Self-Consistency (SC), on tasks requiring precise and error-free outputs, including binary counting, longest substring detection, and arithmetic evaluation. To support this study, we introduce a synthetic dataset with diverse natural language instructions, enabling controlled evaluation of exact computation across multiple task types. Our results show that standard prompting methods achieve only moderate accuracy on sequence-based tasks. CoT provides limited improvement, while Least-to-Most suffers from error accumulation. In contrast, PoT achieves perfect accuracy by generating executable code and delegating computation to an external interpreter. Self-Consistency improves robustness through majority voting, but incurs substantial computational overhead. We further train a small domain-specific model (CodeT5-small) to generate executable programs, which achieves perfect accuracy on held-out synthetic test data across all tasks with minimal training cost. Overall, our findings suggest that LLMs may simulate reasoning patterns rather than reliably perform exact symbolic computation. For deterministic tasks, combining LLMs with external tools or using specialized models provides a more reliable and efficient solution.

Related papers

• The Imitation Game: When LLMs Learn to Reason Like Programs via Code-Centric Reasoning Data Synthesis [50.473217152006875]
  MIMIC is a framework that leverages executable code as a rigorous medium for reasoning data synthesis.<n>MIMIC transforms algorithms into verifiable reasoning trajectories through narrative fusion, code-guided test synthesis, and dynamic code instrumentation.<n>Our method significantly elevates accuracy across general reasoning, complex mathematical benchmarks, and fine-grained deterministic tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-13T17:04:16Z)
• Evaluating the Formal Reasoning Capabilities of Large Language Models through Chomsky Hierarchy [62.32144504442516]
  It is unknown whether SOTA LLMs can grasp the structured, hierarchical complexity of formal languages.<n>ChomskyBench is a benchmark for systematically evaluating LLMs through the lens of Chomsky Hierarchy.<n>ChomskyBench is composed of a comprehensive suite of language recognition and generation tasks designed to test capabilities at each level.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-03T04:06:39Z)
• AgentMath: Empowering Mathematical Reasoning for Large Language Models via Tool-Augmented Agent [80.83250816918861]
  Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) like o3 and DeepSeek-R1 have achieved remarkable progress in natural language reasoning with long chain-of-thought.<n>However, they remain computationally inefficient and struggle with accuracy when solving problems requiring complex mathematical operations.<n>We present AgentMath, an agent framework that seamlessly integrates language models' reasoning capabilities with code interpreters' computational precision.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-23T19:57:49Z)
• RELIC: Evaluating Compositional Instruction Following via Language Recognition [37.49115450182637]
  Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly expected to perform tasks based only on a specification of the task provided in context.<n>We introduce the Recognition of Languages In-Context (RELIC) framework to evaluate instruction following using language recognition.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-05T16:17:24Z)
• Program Semantic Inequivalence Game with Large Language Models [20.43560028315856]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) can achieve strong performance on everyday coding tasks, but they can fail on complex tasks that require non-trivial reasoning about program semantics.<n>In this work, we explore a method to synthetically generate code reasoning training data based on a semantic inequivalence game SInQ.<n>We prove that this setup enables theoretically unlimited improvement through self-play in the limit of infinite computational resources.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-02T20:03:35Z)
• EquiBench: Benchmarking Large Language Models' Reasoning about Program Semantics via Equivalence Checking [58.15568681219339]
  We introduce EquiBench, a new benchmark for evaluating large language models (LLMs)<n>This task directly tests a model's ability to reason about program semantics.<n>We evaluate 19 state-of-the-art LLMs and find that in the most challenging categories, the best accuracies are 63.8% and 76.2%, only modestly above the 50% random baseline.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-18T02:54:25Z)
• Code Simulation as a Proxy for High-order Tasks in Large Language Models [6.71786454125056]
  We collect pairs of naturalistic and synthetic reasoning tasks to assess the capabilities of Large Language Models (LLM)<n>We leverage common constructs in programming as the counterpart of the building blocks of naturalistic reasoning tasks.<n>Our contribution builds upon synthetically testing the reasoning capabilities of LLMs as a scalable complement to handcrafted human-annotated problems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-05T19:30:28Z)
• 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)
• On Speeding Up Language Model Evaluation [48.51924035873411]
  We propose an $textitadaptive$ approach to explore this space.<n>We lean on multi-armed bandits to sequentially identify the next (method, validation sample)-pair to evaluate.<n>We show that it can identify the top-performing method using only 5-15% of the typical resources.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-08T17:48:42Z)
• Code Simulation Challenges for Large Language Models [6.970495767499435]
  This work studies to what extent Large Language Models (LLMs) can simulate coding and algorithmic tasks. We introduce benchmarks for straight-line programs, code that contains critical paths, and approximate and redundant instructions. We propose a novel off-the-shelf prompting method, Chain of Simulation (CoSm), which instructs LLMs to simulate code execution line by line/follow the pattern of compilers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-17T09:23:59Z)
• Evaluating and Improving Tool-Augmented Computation-Intensive Math Reasoning [75.74103236299477]
  Chain-of-thought prompting(CoT) and tool augmentation have been validated as effective practices for improving large language models. We propose a new approach that can deliberate the reasoning steps with tool interfaces, namely textbfDELI. Experimental results on CARP and six other datasets show that the proposed DELI mostly outperforms competitive baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-04T17:02:59Z)
• SatLM: Satisfiability-Aided Language Models Using Declarative Prompting [68.40726892904286]
  We propose a new satisfiability-aided language modeling (SatLM) approach for improving the reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs) We use an LLM to generate a declarative task specification rather than an imperative program and leverage an off-the-shelf automated theorem prover to derive the final answer. We evaluate SATLM on 8 different datasets and show that it consistently outperforms program-aided LMs in the imperative paradigm.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-16T17:55:51Z)

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.