# Code Prompting: a Neural Symbolic Method for Complex Reasoning in Large Language Models

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.18507 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.18507/

## Key facts

- Cited by 16 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 28 of its 42 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 29 May 2023.

## 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, 28 of 28)

- [Language Models are Few-Shot Learners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.14165/) (2020)
- [Exploring the Limits of Transfer Learning with a Unified Text-to-Text Transformer](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1910.10683/) (2019)
- [LLaMA: Open and Efficient Foundation Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.13971/) (2023)
- [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)
- [Scaling Laws for Neural Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2001.08361/) (2020)
- [Self-Consistency Improves Chain of Thought Reasoning in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.11171/) (2022)
- [Large Language Models are Zero-Shot Reasoners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.11916/) (2022)
- [OPT: Open Pre-trained Transformer Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.01068/) (2022)
- [Least-to-Most Prompting Enables Complex Reasoning in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.10625/) (2022)
- [LaMDA: Language Models for Dialog Applications](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2201.08239/) (2022)
- [Program of Thoughts Prompting: Disentangling Computation from Reasoning for Numerical Reasoning Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2211.12588/) (2022)
- [Measuring and Narrowing the Compositionality Gap in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.03350/) (2022)
- [Teaching Large Language Models to Self-Debug](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.05128/) (2023)
- [Are NLP Models really able to Solve Simple Math Word Problems?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.07191/) (2021)
- [AGIEval: A Human-Centric Benchmark for Evaluating Foundation Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.06364/) (2023)
- [Automatic Chain of Thought Prompting in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.03493/) (2022)
- [MathQA: Towards Interpretable Math Word Problem Solving with Operation-Based Formalisms](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1905.13319/) (2019)
- [PAL: Program-aided Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2211.10435/) (2022)
- [Decomposed Prompting: A Modular Approach for Solving Complex Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.02406/) (2022)
- [Is ChatGPT a General-Purpose Natural Language Processing Task Solver?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.06476/) (2023)
- [Complexity-Based Prompting for Multi-Step Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.00720/) (2022)
- [Solving General Arithmetic Word Problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1608.01413/) (2016)
- [Binding Language Models in Symbolic Languages](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.02875/) (2022)
- [Solving Math Word Problems by Combining Language Models With Symbolic Solvers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.09102/) (2023)
- [Compositional Generalization via Neural-Symbolic Stack Machines](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2008.06662/) (2020)
- [Semantically-Aligned Equation Generation for Solving and Reasoning Math Word Problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1811.00720/) (2018)

## Built on by (most cited first, 16 of 16)

- [OctoPack: Instruction Tuning Code Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.07124/) (2023)
- [Phenomenal Yet Puzzling: Testing Inductive Reasoning Capabilities of Language Models with Hypothesis Refinement](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.08559/) (2023)
- [Unlocking the Capabilities of Thought: A Reasoning Boundary Framework to Quantify and Optimize Chain-of-Thought](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.05695/) (2024)
- [Code to Think, Think to Code: A Survey on Code-Enhanced Reasoning and Reasoning-Driven Code Intelligence in LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.19411/) (2025)
- [Flow of Reasoning: Training LLMs for Divergent Reasoning with Minimal Examples](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.05673/) (2024)
- [When Do Program-of-Thoughts Work for Reasoning?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.15452/) (2023)
- [Mixed Distillation Helps Smaller Language Model Better Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.10730/) (2023)
- [SymRTLO: Enhancing RTL Code Optimization with LLMs and Neuron-Inspired Symbolic Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.10369/) (2025)
- [Natural Language Embedded Programs for Hybrid Language Symbolic Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.10814/) (2023)
- [A Theory for Length Generalization in Learning to Reason](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.00560/) (2024)
- [Graph Elicitation for Guiding Multi-Step Reasoning in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.09762/) (2023)
- [Conditions for Length Generalization in Learning Reasoning Skills](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.16173/) (2023)
- [Beyond Single-Task: Robust Multi-Task Length Generalization for LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.11525/) (2025)
- [Unveiling the Magic of Code Reasoning through Hypothesis Decomposition and Amendment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.13170/) (2025)
- [FinCoT: Grounding Chain-of-Thought in Expert Financial Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.16123/) (2025)
- [RBF++: Quantifying and Optimizing Reasoning Boundaries across Measurable and Unmeasurable Capabilities for Chain-of-Thought Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.13307/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Large language models (LLMs) have scaled up to unlock a wide range of complex reasoning tasks with the aid of various prompting methods. However, current prompting methods generate natural language intermediate steps to help reasoning, which can cause imperfect task reduction and confusion. To mitigate such limitations, we explore code prompting, a neural symbolic prompting method with both zero-shot and few-shot versions which triggers code as intermediate steps. We conduct experiments on 7 widely-used benchmarks involving symbolic reasoning and arithmetic reasoning. Code prompting generally outperforms chain-of-thought (CoT) prompting. To further understand the performance and limitations of code prompting, we perform extensive ablation studies and error analyses, and identify several exclusive advantages of using symbolic promptings compared to natural language. We also consider the ensemble of code prompting and CoT prompting to combine the strengths of both. Finally, we show through experiments how code annotations and their locations affect code prompting.