# Prompt Recursive Search: A Living Framework with Adaptive Growth in LLM Auto-Prompting

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2408.01423 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.01423/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 24 of its 34 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 2 Aug 2024.

## Builds on (most cited first, 24 of 24)

- [Attention Is All You Need](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1706.03762/) (2017)
- [BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understanding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1810.04805/) (2018)
- [Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2201.11903/) (2022)
- [BART: Denoising Sequence-to-Sequence Pre-training for Natural Language Generation, Translation, and Comprehension](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1910.13461/) (2019)
- [GLUE: A Multi-Task Benchmark and Analysis Platform for Natural Language Understanding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1804.07461/) (2018)
- [Large Language Models are Zero-Shot Reasoners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.11916/) (2022)
- [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)
- [A Survey of Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.18223/) (2023)
- [Survey of Hallucination in Natural Language Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2202.03629/) (2022)
- [Challenging BIG-Bench Tasks and Whether Chain-of-Thought Can Solve Them](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.09261/) (2022)
- [Large Language Models Are Human-Level Prompt Engineers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2211.01910/) (2022)
- [Graph of Thoughts: Solving Elaborate Problems with Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.09687/) (2023)
- [Automatic Chain of Thought Prompting in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.03493/) (2022)
- [Automatic Prompt Optimization with "Gradient Descent" and Beam Search](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.03495/) (2023)
- [Plan-and-Solve Prompting: Improving Zero-Shot Chain-of-Thought Reasoning by Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.04091/) (2023)
- [Explainability for Large Language Models: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.01029/) (2023)
- [Unleashing the Emergent Cognitive Synergy in Large Language Models: A Task-Solving Agent through Multi-Persona Self-Collaboration](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.05300/) (2023)
- [A Comprehensive Survey of AI-Generated Content (AIGC): A History of Generative AI from GAN to ChatGPT](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.04226/) (2023)
- [Thought Propagation: An Analogical Approach to Complex Reasoning with Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.03965/) (2023)
- [Detecting LLM-Generated Text in Computing Education: A Comparative Study for ChatGPT Cases](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.07411/) (2023)
- [Large Language Model (LLM) Bias Index -- LLMBI](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.14769/) (2023)
- [Intent-based Prompt Calibration: Enhancing prompt optimization with synthetic boundary cases](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.03099/) (2024)
- [AI Revolution on Chat Bot: Evidence from a Randomized Controlled Experiment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.10956/) (2024)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Large Language Models (LLMs) exhibit remarkable proficiency in addressing a diverse array of tasks within the Natural Language Processing (NLP) domain, with various prompt design strategies significantly augmenting their capabilities. However, these prompts, while beneficial, each possess inherent limitations. The primary prompt design methodologies are twofold: The first, exemplified by the Chain of Thought (CoT), involves manually crafting prompts specific to individual datasets, hence termed Expert-Designed Prompts (EDPs). Once these prompts are established, they are unalterable, and their effectiveness is capped by the expertise of the human designers. When applied to LLMs, the static nature of EDPs results in a uniform approach to both simple and complex problems within the same dataset, leading to the inefficient use of tokens for straightforward issues. The second method involves prompts autonomously generated by the LLM, known as LLM-Derived Prompts (LDPs), which provide tailored solutions to specific problems, mitigating the limitations of EDPs. However, LDPs may encounter a decline in performance when tackling complex problems due to the potential for error accumulation during the solution planning process. To address these challenges, we have conceived a novel Prompt Recursive Search (PRS) framework that leverages the LLM to generate solutions specific to the problem, thereby conserving tokens. The framework incorporates an assessment of problem complexity and an adjustable structure, ensuring a reduction in the likelihood of errors. We have substantiated the efficacy of PRS framework through extensive experiments using LLMs with different numbers of parameters across a spectrum of datasets in various domains. Compared to the CoT method, the PRS method has increased the accuracy on the BBH dataset by 8% using Llama3-7B model, achieving a 22% improvement.