# Refining Answer Distributions for Improved Large Language Model Reasoning

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2412.13292 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.13292/

## Key facts

- Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning.
- Builds on 20 of its 43 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 17 Dec 2024.

## Placed in

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

## Builds on (most cited first, 20 of 20)

- [GPT-4 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.08774/) (2023)
- [The Llama 3 Herd of Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.21783/) (2024)
- [Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.14168/) (2021)
- [Tree of Thoughts: Deliberate Problem Solving with Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.10601/) (2023)
- [Emergent Abilities of Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2206.07682/) (2022)
- [Improving Factuality and Reasoning in Language Models through Multiagent Debate](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.14325/) (2023)
- [STaR: Bootstrapping Reasoning With Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.14465/) (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)
- [Language Models Are Greedy Reasoners: A Systematic Formal Analysis of Chain-of-Thought](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.01240/) (2022)
- [ReConcile: Round-Table Conference Improves Reasoning via Consensus among Diverse LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.13007/) (2023)
- [REFINER: Reasoning Feedback on Intermediate Representations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.01904/) (2023)
- [Navigate through Enigmatic Labyrinth A Survey of Chain of Thought Reasoning: Advances, Frontiers and Future](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.15402/) (2023)
- [Progressive-Hint Prompting Improves Reasoning in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.09797/) (2023)
- [Retroformer: Retrospective Large Language Agents with Policy Gradient Optimization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.02151/) (2023)
- [RL4F: Generating Natural Language Feedback with Reinforcement Learning for Repairing Model Outputs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.08844/) (2023)
- [LLMs cannot find reasoning errors, but can correct them given the error location](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.08516/) (2023)
- [Deliberate then Generate: Enhanced Prompting Framework for Text Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.19835/) (2023)
- [Hint-before-Solving Prompting: Guiding LLMs to Effectively Utilize Encoded Knowledge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.14310/) (2024)
- [Self-Convinced Prompting: Few-Shot Question Answering with Repeated Introspection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.05035/) (2023)

## Built on by (most cited first, 3 of 3)

- [Reasoning on a Budget: A Survey of Adaptive and Controllable Test-Time Compute in LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.02076/) (2025)
- [Causal Sufficiency and Necessity Improves Chain-of-Thought Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.09853/) (2025)
- [MatryoshkaThinking: Recursive Test-Time Scaling Enables Efficient Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.10293/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Large Language Models (LLMs) have exhibited an impressive capability to perform reasoning tasks, especially if they are encouraged to generate a sequence of intermediate steps. Reasoning performance can be improved by suitably combining multiple LLM responses, generated either in parallel in a single query, or via sequential interactions with LLMs throughout the reasoning process. Existing strategies for combination, such as self-consistency and progressive-hint-prompting, make inefficient usage of the LLM responses. We present Refined Answer Distributions, a novel and principled algorithmic framework to enhance the reasoning capabilities of LLMs. Our approach can be viewed as an iterative sampling strategy for forming a Monte Carlo approximation of an underlying distribution of answers, with the goal of identifying the mode -- the most likely answer. Empirical evaluation on several reasoning benchmarks demonstrates the superiority of the proposed approach.