# Reasoning Strategies in Large Language Models: Can They Follow, Prefer, and Optimize?

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2507.11423 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.11423/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning.
- Builds on 14 of its 26 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 15 Jul 2025.

## Placed in

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

## Builds on (most cited first, 14 of 14)

- [Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.14168/) (2021)
- [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)
- [Large Language Monkeys: Scaling Inference Compute with Repeated Sampling](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.21787/) (2024)
- [Program Induction by Rationale Generation : Learning to Solve and Explain Algebraic Word Problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1705.04146/) (2017)
- [Generative Verifiers: Reward Modeling as Next-Token Prediction](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.15240/) (2024)
- [Chain-of-Thought Reasoning Without Prompting](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.10200/) (2024)
- [ZebraLogic: On the Scaling Limits of LLMs for Logical Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.01100/) (2025)
- [Embers of Autoregression: Understanding Large Language Models Through the Problem They are Trained to Solve](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.13638/) (2023)
- [How Likely Do LLMs with CoT Mimic Human Reasoning?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.16048/) (2024)
- [Do Language Models Exhibit the Same Cognitive Biases in Problem Solving as Human Learners?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.18070/) (2024)
- [Bridging Internal Probability and Self-Consistency for Effective and Efficient LLM Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.00511/) (2025)
- [Comparing Inferential Strategies of Humans and Large Language Models in Deductive Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.14856/) (2024)
- [Language Models Prefer What They Know: Relative Confidence Estimation via Confidence Preferences](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.01126/) (2025)

## Built on by (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [Assessing mentalization in humans and large language models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.26291/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Human reasoning involves different strategies, each suited to specific problems. Prior work shows that large language model (LLMs) tend to favor a single reasoning strategy, potentially limiting their effectiveness in diverse reasoning challenges. In this work, we investigate whether prompting can control LLMs reasoning strategies and assess its impact on logical problem-solving. While our experiments show that no single strategy consistently improves accuracy, performance could be enhanced if models could adaptively choose the optimal strategy. We propose methods to guide LLMs in strategy selection, highlighting new ways to refine their reasoning abilities.