# From Complex to Simple: Unraveling the Cognitive Tree for Reasoning with Small Language Models

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2311.06754 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.06754/

## Key facts

- Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning.
- Builds on 16 of its 46 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 12 Nov 2023.

## Placed in

- LLM reasoning / [Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/lr/reasoning-benchmarks-and-evaluation/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 16 of 16)

- [LLaMA: Open and Efficient Foundation Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.13971/) (2023)
- [Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.14168/) (2021)
- [Scaling Laws for Neural Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2001.08361/) (2020)
- [Reflexion: Language Agents with Verbal Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.11366/) (2023)
- [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)
- [Tree of Thoughts: Deliberate Problem Solving with Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.10601/) (2023)
- [Self-Instruct: Aligning Language Models with Self-Generated Instructions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.10560/) (2022)
- [Least-to-Most Prompting Enables Complex Reasoning in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.10625/) (2022)
- [Measuring and Narrowing the Compositionality Gap in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.03350/) (2022)
- [Selection-Inference: Exploiting Large Language Models for Interpretable Logical Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.09712/) (2022)
- [MathPrompter: Mathematical Reasoning using Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.05398/) (2023)
- [REFINER: Reasoning Feedback on Intermediate Representations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.01904/) (2023)
- [Why think step by step? Reasoning emerges from the locality of experience](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.03843/) (2023)
- [Explaining Question Answering Models through Text Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2004.05569/) (2020)
- [Explicit Planning Helps Language Models in Logical Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.15714/) (2023)

## Built on by (most cited first, 5 of 5)

- [Position: Towards Bidirectional Human-AI Alignment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.09264/) (2024)
- [Reasoning with OmniThought: A Large CoT Dataset with Verbosity and Cognitive Difficulty Annotations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.10937/) (2025)
- [GRAPHMOE: Amplifying Cognitive Depth of Mixture-of-Experts Network via Introducing Self-Rethinking Mechanism](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.07890/) (2025)
- [Small Language Models (SLMs) Can Still Pack a Punch: A survey (updated 2026)](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.05465/) (2025)
- [Strategic Reflectivism In Intelligent Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.22987/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Reasoning is a distinctive human capacity, enabling us to address complex problems by breaking them down into a series of manageable cognitive steps. Yet, complex logical reasoning is still cumbersome for language models. Based on the dual process theory in cognitive science, we are the first to unravel the cognitive reasoning abilities of language models. Our framework employs an iterative methodology to construct a Cognitive Tree (CogTree). The root node of this tree represents the initial query, while the leaf nodes consist of straightforward questions that can be answered directly. This construction involves two main components: the implicit extraction module (referred to as the intuitive system) and the explicit reasoning module (referred to as the reflective system). The intuitive system rapidly generates multiple responses by utilizing in-context examples, while the reflective system scores these responses using comparative learning. The scores guide the intuitive system in its subsequent generation step. Our experimental results on two popular and challenging reasoning tasks indicate that it is possible to achieve a performance level comparable to that of GPT-3.5 (with 175B parameters), using a significantly smaller language model that contains fewer parameters (<=7B) than 5% of GPT-3.5.