# Text and Patterns: For Effective Chain of Thought, It Takes Two to Tango

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2209.07686 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2209.07686/

## Key facts

- Cited by 128 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Prompting and chain-of-thought reasoning, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning.
- Builds on 47 of its 84 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 16 Sep 2022.

## Placed in

- LLM reasoning / [Prompting and chain-of-thought reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/lr/prompting-and-chain-of-thought-reasoning/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 47)

- [Attention Is All You Need](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1706.03762/) (2017)
- [Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.02155/) (2022)
- [Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2201.11903/) (2022)
- [Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.14168/) (2021)
- [Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Code](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2107.03374/) (2021)
- [Self-Consistency Improves Chain of Thought Reasoning in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.11171/) (2022)
- [PaLM: Scaling Language Modeling with Pathways](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2204.02311/) (2022)
- ["Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifier](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1602.04938/) (2016)
- [Large Language Models are Zero-Shot Reasoners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.11916/) (2022)
- [Finetuned Language Models Are Zero-Shot Learners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2109.01652/) (2021)
- [The Curious Case of Neural Text Degeneration](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1904.09751/) (2019)
- [Do As I Can, Not As I Say: Grounding Language in Robotic Affordances](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2204.01691/) (2022)
- [Pre-train, Prompt, and Predict: A Systematic Survey of Prompting Methods in Natural Language Processing](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2107.13586/) (2021)
- [Beyond the Imitation Game: Quantifying and extrapolating the capabilities of language models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2206.04615/) (2022)
- [SentencePiece: A simple and language independent subword tokenizer and detokenizer for Neural Text Processing](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1808.06226/) (2018)
- [Multitask Prompted Training Enables Zero-Shot Task Generalization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.08207/) (2021)
- [Competition-Level Code Generation with AlphaCode](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.07814/) (2022)
- [Rethinking the Role of Demonstrations: What Makes In-Context Learning Work?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2202.12837/) (2022)
- [Least-to-Most Prompting Enables Complex Reasoning in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.10625/) (2022)
- [Solving Quantitative Reasoning Problems with Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2206.14858/) (2022)
- [LaMDA: Language Models for Dialog Applications](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2201.08239/) (2022)
- [What Makes Good In-Context Examples for GPT-3?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2101.06804/) (2021)
- [An Explanation of In-context Learning as Implicit Bayesian Inference](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2111.02080/) (2021)
- [Attention is not Explanation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1902.10186/) (2019)
- [Show Your Work: Scratchpads for Intermediate Computation with Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2112.00114/) (2021)
- [Are NLP Models really able to Solve Simple Math Word Problems?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.07191/) (2021)
- [Program Induction by Rationale Generation : Learning to Solve and Explain Algebraic Word Problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1705.04146/) (2017)
- [Learning To Retrieve Prompts for In-Context Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2112.08633/) (2021)
- [Explaining Machine Learning Classifiers through Diverse Counterfactual Explanations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1905.07697/) (2019)
- [Using cognitive psychology to understand GPT-3](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2206.14576/) (2022)

## Built on by (most cited first, 30 of 128)

- [ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.03629/) (2022)
- [A Survey of Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.18223/) (2023)
- [Challenging BIG-Bench Tasks and Whether Chain-of-Thought Can Solve Them](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.09261/) (2022)
- [Language Models Don't Always Say What They Think: Unfaithful Explanations in Chain-of-Thought Prompting](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.04388/) (2023)
- [Large Language Models as Optimizers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.03409/) (2023)
- [Large Language Models Can Be Easily Distracted by Irrelevant Context](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.00093/) (2023)
- [Training Large Language Models to Reason in a Continuous Latent Space](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.06769/) (2024)
- [Measuring Faithfulness in Chain-of-Thought Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.13702/) (2023)
- [PAL: Program-aided Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2211.10435/) (2022)
- [Promptbreeder: Self-Referential Self-Improvement Via Prompt Evolution](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.16797/) (2023)
- [Larger language models do in-context learning differently](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.03846/) (2023)
- [Language Models can Solve Computer Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.17491/) (2023)
- [Explainability for Large Language Models: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.01029/) (2023)
- [ToolQA: A Dataset for LLM Question Answering with External Tools](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.13304/) (2023)
- [Think before you speak: Training Language Models With Pause Tokens](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.02226/) (2023)
- [To CoT or not to CoT? Chain-of-thought helps mainly on math and symbolic reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.12183/) (2024)
- [Chain of Thought Empowers Transformers to Solve Inherently Serial Problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.12875/) (2024)
- [Towards Understanding Chain-of-Thought Prompting: An Empirical Study of What Matters](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.10001/) (2022)
- [What Algorithms can Transformers Learn? A Study in Length Generalization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.16028/) (2023)
- [Navigate through Enigmatic Labyrinth A Survey of Chain of Thought Reasoning: Advances, Frontiers and Future](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.15402/) (2023)
- [The Impact of Reasoning Step Length on Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.04925/) (2024)
- [Large Language Model Cascades with Mixture of Thoughts Representations for Cost-efficient Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.03094/) (2023)
- [Thought Anchors: Which LLM Reasoning Steps Matter?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.19143/) (2025)
- [A Practical Review of Mechanistic Interpretability for Transformer-Based Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.02646/) (2024)
- [Meta-Prompting: Enhancing Language Models with Task-Agnostic Scaffolding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.12954/) (2024)
- [Teaching Algorithmic Reasoning via In-context Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2211.09066/) (2022)
- [Rethinking Interpretability in the Era of Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.01761/) (2024)
- [Question Decomposition Improves the Faithfulness of Model-Generated Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.11768/) (2023)
- [Symbol tuning improves in-context learning in language models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.08298/) (2023)
- [Dr.ICL: Demonstration-Retrieved In-context Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.14128/) (2023)

## Abstract (arXiv)

The past decade has witnessed dramatic gains in natural language processing and an unprecedented scaling of large language models. These developments have been accelerated by the advent of few-shot techniques such as chain of thought (CoT) prompting. Specifically, CoT pushes the performance of large language models in a few-shot setup by augmenting the prompts with intermediate steps. Despite impressive results across various tasks, the reasons behind their success have not been explored. This work uses counterfactual prompting to develop a deeper understanding of CoT-based few-shot prompting mechanisms in large language models. We first systematically identify and define the key components of a prompt: symbols, patterns, and text. Then, we devise and conduct an exhaustive set of experiments across four different tasks, by querying the model with counterfactual prompts where only one of these components is altered. Our experiments across three models (PaLM, GPT-3, and CODEX) reveal several surprising findings and brings into question the conventional wisdom around few-shot prompting. First, the presence of factual patterns in a prompt is practically immaterial to the success of CoT. Second, our results conclude that the primary role of intermediate steps may not be to facilitate learning how to solve a task. The intermediate steps are rather a beacon for the model to realize what symbols to replicate in the output to form a factual answer. Further, text imbues patterns with commonsense knowledge and meaning. Our empirical and qualitative analysis reveals that a symbiotic relationship between text and patterns explains the success of few-shot prompting: text helps extract commonsense from the question to help patterns, and patterns enforce task understanding and direct text generation.