# CriticBench: Benchmarking LLMs for Critique-Correct Reasoning

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2402.14809 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.14809/

## Key facts

- Cited by 88 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Test-time compute and efficient thinking, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning.
- Builds on 47 of its 63 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 22 Feb 2024.

## Placed in

- LLM reasoning / [Test-time compute and efficient thinking](https://mlsanity.com/lr/test-time-compute-and-efficient-thinking/)

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

- [Language Models are Few-Shot Learners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.14165/) (2020)
- [GPT-4 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.08774/) (2023)
- [Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.02155/) (2022)
- [Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.09288/) (2023)
- [Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.14168/) (2021)
- [Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arena](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.05685/) (2023)
- [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)
- [Measuring Mathematical Problem Solving With the MATH Dataset](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.03874/) (2021)
- [PaLM: Scaling Language Modeling with Pathways](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2204.02311/) (2022)
- [Toolformer: Language Models Can Teach Themselves to Use Tools](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.04761/) (2023)
- [Let's Verify Step by Step](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.20050/) (2023)
- [HotpotQA: A Dataset for Diverse, Explainable Multi-hop Question Answering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1809.09600/) (2018)
- [Program Synthesis with Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2108.07732/) (2021)
- [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)
- [Learning to summarize from human feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2009.01325/) (2020)
- [Beyond the Imitation Game: Quantifying and extrapolating the capabilities of language models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2206.04615/) (2022)
- [CommonsenseQA: A Question Answering Challenge Targeting Commonsense Knowledge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1811.00937/) (2018)
- [Challenging BIG-Bench Tasks and Whether Chain-of-Thought Can Solve Them](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.09261/) (2022)
- [Improving Factuality and Reasoning in Language Models through Multiagent Debate](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.14325/) (2023)
- [WebGPT: Browser-assisted question-answering with human feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2112.09332/) (2021)
- [Least-to-Most Prompting Enables Complex Reasoning in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.10625/) (2022)
- [FEVER: a large-scale dataset for Fact Extraction and VERification](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1803.05355/) (2018)
- [DeepSeek-Coder: When the Large Language Model Meets Programming -- The Rise of Code Intelligence](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.14196/) (2024)
- [Large Language Models are not Fair Evaluators](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.17926/) (2023)
- [Program of Thoughts Prompting: Disentangling Computation from Reasoning for Numerical Reasoning Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2211.12588/) (2022)
- [Large Language Models Cannot Self-Correct Reasoning Yet](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.01798/) (2023)
- [Encouraging Divergent Thinking in Large Language Models through Multi-Agent Debate](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.19118/) (2023)
- [Teaching Large Language Models to Self-Debug](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.05128/) (2023)

## Built on by (most cited first, 30 of 88)

- [Do NOT Think That Much for 2+3=? On the Overthinking of o1-Like LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.21187/) (2024)
- [From System 1 to System 2: A Survey of Reasoning Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.17419/) (2025)
- [ProcessBench: Identifying Process Errors in Mathematical Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.06559/) (2024)
- [Improving Video Generation with Human Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.13918/) (2025)
- [MAmmoTH2: Scaling Instructions from the Web](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.03548/) (2024)
- [A Survey of Efficient Reasoning for Large Reasoning Models: Language, Multimodality, and Beyond](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.21614/) (2025)
- [PRMBench: A Fine-grained and Challenging Benchmark for Process-Level Reward Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.03124/) (2025)
- [DART-Math: Difficulty-Aware Rejection Tuning for Mathematical Problem-Solving](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.13690/) (2024)
- [Agent-R: Training Language Model Agents to Reflect via Iterative Self-Training](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.11425/) (2025)
- [Self-Generated Critiques Boost Reward Modeling for Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.16646/) (2024)
- [Unlocking Multimodal Mathematical Reasoning via Process Reward Model](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.04686/) (2025)
- [Evaluating Step-by-step Reasoning Traces: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.12289/) (2025)
- [Internal Consistency and Self-Feedback in Large Language Models: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.14507/) (2024)
- [A Theoretical Understanding of Self-Correction through In-context Alignment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.18634/) (2024)
- [Can Large Language Models Detect Errors in Long Chain-of-Thought Reasoning?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.19361/) (2025)
- [Evaluating Judges as Evaluators: The JETTS Benchmark of LLM-as-Judges as Test-Time Scaling Evaluators](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.15253/) (2025)
- [A Survey on Data Synthesis and Augmentation for Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.12896/) (2024)
- [A Survey of Test-Time Compute: From Intuitive Inference to Deliberate Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.02497/) (2025)
- [Do LLM Evaluators Prefer Themselves for a Reason?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.03846/) (2025)
- [Evaluating the Evaluator: Measuring LLMs' Adherence to Task Evaluation Instructions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.08781/) (2024)
- [Critic-CoT: Boosting the reasoning abilities of large language model via Chain-of-thoughts Critic](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.16326/) (2024)
- [SELF-[IN]CORRECT: LLMs Struggle with Discriminating Self-Generated Responses](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.04298/) (2024)
- [Heimdall: test-time scaling on the generative verification](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.10337/) (2025)
- [Testing and Understanding Erroneous Planning in LLM Agents through Synthesized User Inputs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.17833/) (2024)
- [Step-KTO: Optimizing Mathematical Reasoning through Stepwise Binary Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.10799/) (2025)
- [VLRMBench: A Comprehensive and Challenging Benchmark for Vision-Language Reward Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.07478/) (2025)
- [CRITICTOOL: Evaluating Self-Critique Capabilities of Large Language Models in Tool-Calling Error Scenarios](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.13977/) (2025)
- [HelpSteer3: Human-Annotated Feedback and Edit Data to Empower Inference-Time Scaling in Open-Ended General-Domain Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.04378/) (2025)
- [DeepCritic: Deliberate Critique with Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.00662/) (2025)
- [Training Language Models to Critique With Multi-agent Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.15287/) (2024)

## Abstract (arXiv)

The ability of Large Language Models (LLMs) to critique and refine their reasoning is crucial for their application in evaluation, feedback provision, and self-improvement. This paper introduces CriticBench, a comprehensive benchmark designed to assess LLMs' abilities to critique and rectify their reasoning across a variety of tasks. CriticBench encompasses five reasoning domains: mathematical, commonsense, symbolic, coding, and algorithmic. It compiles 15 datasets and incorporates responses from three LLM families. Utilizing CriticBench, we evaluate and dissect the performance of 17 LLMs in generation, critique, and correction reasoning, i.e., GQC reasoning. Our findings reveal: (1) a linear relationship in GQC capabilities, with critique-focused training markedly enhancing performance; (2) a task-dependent variation in correction effectiveness, with logic-oriented tasks being more amenable to correction; (3) GQC knowledge inconsistencies that decrease as model size increases; and (4) an intriguing inter-model critiquing dynamic, where stronger models are better at critiquing weaker ones, while weaker models can surprisingly surpass stronger ones in their self-critique. We hope these insights into the nuanced critique-correct reasoning of LLMs will foster further research in LLM critique and self-improvement.