# How Do Humans Write Code? Large Models Do It the Same Way Too

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2402.15729 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.15729/

## Key facts

- Cited by 11 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 29 of its 44 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 24 Feb 2024.

## 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, 29 of 29)

- [Proximal Policy Optimization Algorithms](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1707.06347/) (2017)
- [Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.14168/) (2021)
- [Longformer: The Long-Document Transformer](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2004.05150/) (2020)
- [Efficient Streaming Language Models with Attention Sinks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.17453/) (2023)
- [Fine-Tuning Language Models from Human Preferences](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1909.08593/) (2019)
- [Solving Quantitative Reasoning Problems with Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2206.14858/) (2022)
- [Language Models Don't Always Say What They Think: Unfaithful Explanations in Chain-of-Thought Prompting](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.04388/) (2023)
- [Program of Thoughts Prompting: Disentangling Computation from Reasoning for Numerical Reasoning Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2211.12588/) (2022)
- [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)
- [CRITIC: Large Language Models Can Self-Correct with Tool-Interactive Critiquing](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.11738/) (2023)
- [The RefinedWeb Dataset for Falcon LLM: Outperforming Curated Corpora with Web Data, and Web Data Only](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.01116/) (2023)
- [Measuring Faithfulness in Chain-of-Thought Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.13702/) (2023)
- [WizardMath: Empowering Mathematical Reasoning for Large Language Models via Reinforced Evol-Instruct](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.09583/) (2023)
- [Be Your Own Teacher: Improve the Performance of Convolutional Neural Networks via Self Distillation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1905.08094/) (2019)
- [MAmmoTH: Building Math Generalist Models through Hybrid Instruction Tuning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.05653/) (2023)
- [Analysing Mathematical Reasoning Abilities of Neural Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1904.01557/) (2019)
- [A Diverse Corpus for Evaluating and Developing English Math Word Problem Solvers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2106.15772/) (2021)
- [Towards Revealing the Mystery behind Chain of Thought: A Theoretical Perspective](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.15408/) (2023)
- [Think before you speak: Training Language Models With Pause Tokens](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.02226/) (2023)
- [ReFT: Reasoning with Reinforced Fine-Tuning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.08967/) (2024)
- [Secrets of RLHF in Large Language Models Part I: PPO](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.04964/) (2023)
- [Language Models of Code are Few-Shot Commonsense Learners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.07128/) (2022)
- [SelfCheck: Using LLMs to Zero-Shot Check Their Own Step-by-Step Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.00436/) (2023)
- [OpenMathInstruct-1: A 1.8 Million Math Instruction Tuning Dataset](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.10176/) (2024)
- [Rephrase and Respond: Let Large Language Models Ask Better Questions for Themselves](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.04205/) (2023)
- [NumGLUE: A Suite of Fundamental yet Challenging Mathematical Reasoning Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2204.05660/) (2022)
- [On the Connection between Local Attention and Dynamic Depth-wise Convolution](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2106.04263/) (2021)
- [Ape210K: A Large-Scale and Template-Rich Dataset of Math Word Problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2009.11506/) (2020)

## Built on by (most cited first, 11 of 11)

- [Crossing the Reward Bridge: Expanding RL with Verifiable Rewards Across Diverse Domains](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.23829/) (2025)
- [One Token to Fool LLM-as-a-Judge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.08794/) (2025)
- [The Choice of Divergence: A Neglected Key to Mitigating Diversity Collapse in Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Reward](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.07430/) (2025)
- [I-SHEEP: Self-Alignment of LLM from Scratch through an Iterative Self-Enhancement Paradigm](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.08072/) (2024)
- [To Code or not to Code? Adaptive Tool Integration for Math Language Models via Expectation-Maximization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.00691/) (2025)
- [Reasoning-as-Logic-Units: Scaling Test-Time Reasoning in Large Language Models Through Logic Unit Alignment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.07803/) (2025)
- [Save the Good Prefix: Precise Error Penalization via Process-Supervised RL to Enhance LLM Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.18984/) (2026)
- [SPPO: Sequence-Level PPO for Long-Horizon Reasoning Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.08865/) (2026)
- [DyJR: Preserving Diversity in Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards via Dynamic Jensen-Shannon Replay](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.16157/) (2026)
- [SQL-ASTRA: Alleviating Sparse Feedback in Agentic SQL via Column-Set Matching and Trajectory Aggregation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.16161/) (2026)
- [Parrot: A Training Pipeline Enhances Both Program CoT and Natural Language CoT for Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.25310/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Program-of-Thought (PoT) replaces natural language-based Chain-of-Thought (CoT) as the most popular method in Large Language Models (LLMs) mathematical reasoning tasks by utilizing external tool calls to circumvent computational errors. However, our evaluation of the GPT-4 and Llama series reveals that using PoT introduces more reasoning errors, such as incorrect formulas or flawed logic, compared to CoT. To address this issue, we propose Human-Think Language (HTL), which leverages a suite of strategies that help integrate PoT and CoT, encompassing: (1) a new generation paradigm that uses full CoT reasoning to control code generation. (2) Focus Attention, that directs model attention to the CoT reasoning during PoT to generate more logical code. (3) reinforcement learning that utilizes the accuracy of both CoT and PoT responses as rewards to prevent repetitive reasoning steps in LLMs when solving difficult math problems. Our method achieves an average improvement of 6.5% on the Llama-Base model and 4.3% on the Mistral-Base model across 8 mathematical calculation datasets. It also shows significant effectiveness on five out-of-domain datasets by controlling the model's information flow, exhibiting strong transferability. Additionally, HTL shows the most significant improvement in non-mathematical natural language inference task, contributing to a unified reasoning task framework