# Critique Ability of Large Language Models

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2310.04815 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.04815/

## Key facts

- Cited by 20 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 26 of its 52 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 7 Oct 2023.

## Builds on (most cited first, 26 of 26)

- [GPT-4 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.08774/) (2023)
- [LLaMA: Open and Efficient Foundation Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.13971/) (2023)
- [Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.09288/) (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)
- [Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understanding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2009.03300/) (2020)
- [Self-Consistency Improves Chain of Thought Reasoning in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.11171/) (2022)
- [Let's Verify Step by Step](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.20050/) (2023)
- [Self-Refine: Iterative Refinement with Self-Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.17651/) (2023)
- [Constitutional AI: Harmlessness from AI Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.08073/) (2022)
- [TruthfulQA: Measuring How Models Mimic Human Falsehoods](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2109.07958/) (2021)
- [The Curious Case of Neural Text Degeneration](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1904.09751/) (2019)
- [Emergent Abilities of Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2206.07682/) (2022)
- [G-Eval: NLG Evaluation using GPT-4 with Better Human Alignment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.16634/) (2023)
- [Beyond the Imitation Game: Quantifying and extrapolating the capabilities of language models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2206.04615/) (2022)
- [Solving Quantitative Reasoning Problems with Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2206.14858/) (2022)
- [PaLM 2 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.10403/) (2023)
- [Complexity-Based Prompting for Multi-Step Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.00720/) (2022)
- [Self-critiquing models for assisting human evaluators](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2206.05802/) (2022)
- [XL-Sum: Large-Scale Multilingual Abstractive Summarization for 44 Languages](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2106.13822/) (2021)
- [Principle-Driven Self-Alignment of Language Models from Scratch with Minimal Human Supervision](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.03047/) (2023)
- [The False Promise of Imitating Proprietary LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.15717/) (2023)
- [Measuring Progress on Scalable Oversight for Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2211.03540/) (2022)
- [REFINER: Reasoning Feedback on Intermediate Representations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.01904/) (2023)
- [Chain-of-Thought Hub: A Continuous Effort to Measure Large Language Models' Reasoning Performance](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.17306/) (2023)

## Built on by (most cited first, 20 of 20)

- [Improve Mathematical Reasoning in Language Models by Automated Process Supervision](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.06592/) (2024)
- [Multi-step Problem Solving Through a Verifier: An Empirical Analysis on Model-induced Process Supervision](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.02658/) (2024)
- [Can Large Language Models Detect Errors in Long Chain-of-Thought Reasoning?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.19361/) (2025)
- [Critic-CoT: Boosting the reasoning abilities of large language model via Chain-of-thoughts Critic](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.16326/) (2024)
- [Heimdall: test-time scaling on the generative verification](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.10337/) (2025)
- [A Tutorial on LLM Reasoning: Relevant Methods behind ChatGPT o1](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.10867/) (2025)
- [AdaptiveStep: Automatically Dividing Reasoning Step through Model Confidence](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.13943/) (2025)
- [DeepCritic: Deliberate Critique with Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.00662/) (2025)
- [CriticEval: Evaluating Large Language Model as Critic](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.13764/) (2024)
- [The Road to Artificial SuperIntelligence: A Comprehensive Survey of Superalignment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.16468/) (2024)
- [RealCritic: Towards Effectiveness-Driven Evaluation of Language Model Critiques](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.14492/) (2025)
- [WebDevJudge: Evaluating (M)LLMs as Critiques for Web Development Quality](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.18560/) (2025)
- [CodePMP: Scalable Preference Model Pretraining for Large Language Model Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.02229/) (2024)
- [A Deep Dive Into Large Language Model Code Generation Mistakes: What and Why?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.01414/) (2024)
- [Guided Search Strategies in Non-Serializable Environments with Applications to Software Engineering Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.13652/) (2025)
- [MC-NEST: Enhancing Mathematical Reasoning in Large Language Models leveraging a Monte Carlo Self-Refine Tree](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.15645/) (2024)
- [SED: Self-Evaluation Decoding Enhances Large Language Models for Better Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.16552/) (2024)
- [Accelerating LLM Reasoning via Early Rejection with Partial Reward Modeling](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.01969/) (2025)
- [Can Large Multimodal Models Actively Recognize Faulty Inputs? A Systematic Evaluation Framework of Their Input Scrutiny Ability](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.04017/) (2025)
- [Research Superalignment Should Advance Now with Alternating Competence and Conformity Optimization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.07660/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Critical thinking is essential for rational decision-making and problem-solving. This skill hinges on the ability to provide precise and reasoned critiques and is a hallmark of human intelligence. In the era of large language models (LLMs), this study explores the ability of LLMs to deliver accurate critiques across various tasks. We are interested in this topic as a capable critic model could not only serve as a reliable evaluator, but also as a source of supervised signals for model tuning. Particularly, if a model can self-critique, it has the potential for autonomous self-improvement. To examine this, we introduce a unified evaluation framework for assessing the critique abilities of LLMs. We develop a benchmark called CriticBench, which comprises 3K high-quality natural language queries and corresponding model responses; and annotate the correctness of these responses. The benchmark cover tasks such as math problem-solving, code completion, and question answering. We evaluate multiple LLMs on the collected dataset and our analysis reveals several noteworthy insights: (1) Critique is generally challenging for most LLMs, and this capability often emerges only when models are sufficiently large. (2) In particular, self-critique is especially difficult. Even top-performing LLMs struggle to achieve satisfactory performance. (3) Models tend to have lower critique accuracy on problems where they are most uncertain. To this end, we introduce a simple yet effective baseline named self-check, which leverages self-critique to improve task performance for various models. We hope this study serves as an initial exploration into understanding the critique abilities of LLMs, and aims to inform future research, including the development of more proficient critic models and the application of critiques across diverse tasks.