mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

When is the consistent prediction likely to be a correct prediction?

arXiv 2407.05778 ↗First posted 8 Jul 2024cs.CL cs.AIcited by 8

On the map: LLM reasoning → Test-time compute and efficient thinking

Abstract (arXiv)

Self-consistency (Wang et al., 2023) suggests that the most consistent answer obtained through large language models (LLMs) is more likely to be correct. In this paper, we challenge this argument and propose a nuanced correction. Our observations indicate that consistent answers derived through more computation i.e. longer reasoning texts, rather than simply the most consistent answer across all outputs, are more likely to be correct. This is predominantly because we demonstrate that LLMs can autonomously produce chain-of-thought (CoT) style reasoning with no custom prompts merely while generating longer responses, which lead to consistent predictions that are more accurate. In the zero-shot setting, by sampling Mixtral-8x7B model multiple times and considering longer responses, we achieve 86% of its self-consistency performance obtained through zero-shot CoT prompting on the GSM8K and MultiArith datasets. Finally, we demonstrate that the probability of LLMs generating a longer response is quite low, highlighting the need for decoding strategies conditioned on output length.

Key facts. Cited by 8 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Test-time compute and efficient thinking, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 10 of its 35 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 8 Jul 2024.

Builds on

10 of 35 references.

References · 10

  1. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
  2. 2021Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problemscited by 9,743
  3. 2022Self-Consistency Improves Chain of Thought Reasoning in Language Modelscited by 5,601
  4. 2022Large Language Models are Zero-Shot Reasonerscited by 4,323
  5. 2017Program Induction by Rationale Generation : Learning to Solve and Explain Algebraic Word Problemscited by 642
  6. 2019Explain Yourself! Leveraging Language Models for Commonsense Reasoningcited by 367
  7. 2016Solving General Arithmetic Word Problemscited by 353
  8. 2024Chain-of-Thought Reasoning Without Promptingcited by 208
  9. 2024Let's Think Dot by Dot: Hidden Computation in Transformer Language Modelscited by 186
  10. 2024TOOLVERIFIER: Generalization to New Tools via Self-Verificationcited by 23

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 1; 2025: 4; 2026: 3.

8 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026Enhancing reasoning accuracy in large language models during inference time
  2. 2025Self-Consistency Is Losing Its Edge: Diminishing Returns and Rising Costs in Modern LLMs
  3. 2023Self-Consistency of Large Language Models under Ambiguity
  4. 2023Two Failures of Self-Consistency in the Multi-Step Reasoning of LLMs
  5. 2025Optimal Self-Consistency for Efficient Reasoning with Large Language Models
  6. 2025Latent Self-Consistency for Reliable Majority-Set Selection in Short- and Long-Answer Reasoning
  7. 2026When are likely answers right? On Sequence Probability and Correctness in LLMs
  8. 2025A Theoretical Study on Bridging Internal Probability and Self-Consistency for LLM Reasoning