# Make LLMs better zero-shot reasoners: Structure-orientated autonomous reasoning

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.19000 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.19000/

## Key facts

- Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning.
- Builds on 31 of its 36 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 18 Oct 2024.

## Placed in

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

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 31)

- [Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2201.11903/) (2022)
- [ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.03629/) (2022)
- [Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understanding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2009.03300/) (2020)
- [Self-Consistency Improves Chain of Thought Reasoning in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.11171/) (2022)
- [Large Language Models are Zero-Shot Reasoners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.11916/) (2022)
- [Reflexion: Language Agents with Verbal Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.11366/) (2023)
- [HotpotQA: A Dataset for Diverse, Explainable Multi-hop Question Answering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1809.09600/) (2018)
- [Self-Refine: Iterative Refinement with Self-Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.17651/) (2023)
- [Qwen Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.16609/) (2023)
- [Tree of Thoughts: Deliberate Problem Solving with Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.10601/) (2023)
- [MetaGPT: Meta Programming for A Multi-Agent Collaborative Framework](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.00352/) (2023)
- [FEVER: a large-scale dataset for Fact Extraction and VERification](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1803.05355/) (2018)
- [An Explanation of In-context Learning as Implicit Bayesian Inference](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2111.02080/) (2021)
- [Interleaving Retrieval with Chain-of-Thought Reasoning for Knowledge-Intensive Multi-Step Questions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.10509/) (2022)
- [Graph of Thoughts: Solving Elaborate Problems with Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.09687/) (2023)
- [CRITIC: Large Language Models Can Self-Correct with Tool-Interactive Critiquing](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.11738/) (2023)
- [Towards Reasoning in Large Language Models: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.10403/) (2022)
- [FreshLLMs: Refreshing Large Language Models with Search Engine Augmentation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.03214/) (2023)
- [Large Language Models for Mathematical Reasoning: Progresses and Challenges](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.00157/) (2024)
- [Reasoning with Language Model Prompting: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.09597/) (2022)
- [Data Interpreter: An LLM Agent For Data Science](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.18679/) (2024)
- [REFINER: Reasoning Feedback on Intermediate Representations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.01904/) (2023)
- [Chain-of-Knowledge: Grounding Large Language Models via Dynamic Knowledge Adapting over Heterogeneous Sources](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.13269/) (2023)
- [AgentScope: A Flexible yet Robust Multi-Agent Platform](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.14034/) (2024)
- [Why think step by step? Reasoning emerges from the locality of experience](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.03843/) (2023)
- [Compositional Semantic Parsing with Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2209.15003/) (2022)
- [BadChain: Backdoor Chain-of-Thought Prompting for Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.12242/) (2024)
- [Exploring Code Analysis: Zero-Shot Insights on Syntax and Semantics with LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.12138/) (2023)
- [Preemptive Answer "Attacks" on Chain-of-Thought Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.20902/) (2024)
- [Why Can Large Language Models Generate Correct Chain-of-Thoughts?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.13571/) (2023)

## Built on by (most cited first, 6 of 6)

- [Retrieval-Augmented Generation with Graphs (GraphRAG)](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.00309/) (2024)
- [Red-Teaming LLM Multi-Agent Systems via Communication Attacks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.14847/) (2025)
- [Stepwise Perplexity-Guided Refinement for Efficient Chain-of-Thought Reasoning in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.13260/) (2025)
- [TRAJECT-Bench:A Trajectory-Aware Benchmark for Evaluating Agentic Tool Use](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.04550/) (2025)
- [To trust or not to trust: Attention-based Trust Management for LLM Multi-Agent Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.02546/) (2025)
- [Co-RedTeam: Orchestrated Security Discovery and Exploitation with LLM Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.02164/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Zero-shot reasoning methods with Large Language Models (LLMs) offer significant advantages including great generalization to novel tasks and reduced dependency on human-crafted examples. However, the current zero-shot methods still have limitations in complex tasks, e.g., answering questions that require multi-step reasoning. In this paper, we address this limitation by introducing a novel structure-oriented analysis method to help LLMs better understand the question and guide the problem-solving process of LLMs. We first demonstrate how the existing reasoning strategies, Chain-of-Thought and ReAct, can benefit from our structure-oriented analysis. In addition to empirical investigations, we leverage the probabilistic graphical model to theoretically explain why our structure-oriented analysis can improve the LLM reasoning process. To further improve the reliability in complex question-answering tasks, we propose a multi-agent reasoning system, Structure-oriented Autonomous Reasoning Agents (SARA), that can better enforce the reasoning process following our structure-oriented analysis by refinement techniques and is equipped with external knowledge retrieval capability to reduce factual errors. Extensive experiments verify the effectiveness of the proposed reasoning system. Surprisingly, in some cases, the system even surpasses few-shot methods. Finally, the system not only improves reasoning accuracy in complex tasks but also demonstrates robustness against potential attacks that corrupt the reasoning process.