Large Language Models are Zero-Shot Reasoners

Authors: Takeshi Kojima, Shixiang Shane Gu, Machel Reid, Yutaka Matsuo, Yusuke Iwasawa

Accepted to NeurIPS2022. Our code is available at https://github.com/kojima-takeshi188/zero_shot_cot

Results of the summarizing process for the arXiv paper: 2205.11916v4

  • Comprehensive Summary
  • Key points
  • Layman's Summary
  • Blog article
In their paper titled "Large Language Models are Zero-Shot Reasoners," authors Takeshi Kojima, Shixiang Shane Gu, Machel Reid, Yutaka Matsuo, and Yusuke Iwasawa explore the zero-shot reasoning capabilities of pretrained large language models (LLMs). LLMs are widely used in various sub-fields of natural language processing (NLP) and are known for their excellent few-shot learning abilities with task-specific exemplars. The authors specifically focus on the chain of thought (CoT) prompting technique, which elicits complex multi-step reasoning through step-by-step answer examples. CoT prompting has achieved state-of-the-art performances in arithmetics and symbolic reasoning tasks that do not follow the standard scaling laws for LLMs. While these successes are often attributed to LLMs' few-shot learning ability, the authors demonstrate that LLMs can also be decent zero-shot reasoners by simply adding the phrase "Let's think step by step" before each answer. To validate their approach, the authors introduce Zero-shot-CoT, which utilizes a single prompt template across diverse benchmark reasoning tasks. Experimental results show that Zero-shot-CoT significantly outperforms zero-shot LLM performances on tasks such as arithmetics (MultiArith, GSM8K, AQUA–RAT, SVAMP), symbolic reasoning (Last Letter, Coin Flip), and other logical reasoning tasks (Date Understanding, Tracking Shuffled Objects). These improvements are achieved without any handcrafted few–shot examples. For example, using the large InstructGPT model (text–davinci–002), Zero–shot–CoT increases accuracy on MultiArith from 17.7% to 78.7% and on GSM8K from 10.4% to 40.7%. Similar magnitudes of improvements are observed with another off–the–shelf large model called PaLM with 540B parameters. The authors argue that the versatility of this single prompt across diverse reasoning tasks suggests untapped and understudied fundamental zero–shot capabilities of LLMs. They propose that high–level cognitive capabilities can be extracted from LLMs through simple prompting without crafting finetuning datasets or few–shot exemplars. The paper has been accepted to NeurIPS2022 and its code is available on GitHub for further reference.
AI-generated keywords: Zero-Shot Reasoning LLMs CoT Prompting Multi-Step Reasoning NeurIPS2022

AI-generated Key Points

  • Large language models (LLMs) are explored for their zero-shot reasoning capabilities
  • The authors focus on the chain of thought (CoT) prompting technique for complex multi-step reasoning
  • CoT prompting has achieved state-of-the-art performances in arithmetics and symbolic reasoning tasks
  • LLMs can be decent zero-shot reasoners by adding the phrase "Let's think step by step" before each answer
  • Zero-shot-CoT significantly outperforms zero-shot LLM performances on various benchmark reasoning tasks
  • Improvements are achieved without handcrafted few-shot examples
  • Using different large models, such as InstructGPT and PaLM, similar magnitudes of improvements are observed
  • The single prompt used suggests untapped and understudied fundamental zero-shot capabilities of LLMs
  • High-level cognitive capabilities can be extracted from LLMs through simple prompting without crafting finetuning datasets or few-shot exemplars
Also access our AI generated: Comprehensive summary, Lay summary, Blog-like article; or ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant.

Abstract: Pretrained large language models (LLMs) are widely used in many sub-fields of natural language processing (NLP) and generally known as excellent few-shot learners with task-specific exemplars. Notably, chain of thought (CoT) prompting, a recent technique for eliciting complex multi-step reasoning through step-by-step answer examples, achieved the state-of-the-art performances in arithmetics and symbolic reasoning, difficult system-2 tasks that do not follow the standard scaling laws for LLMs. While these successes are often attributed to LLMs' ability for few-shot learning, we show that LLMs are decent zero-shot reasoners by simply adding "Let's think step by step" before each answer. Experimental results demonstrate that our Zero-shot-CoT, using the same single prompt template, significantly outperforms zero-shot LLM performances on diverse benchmark reasoning tasks including arithmetics (MultiArith, GSM8K, AQUA-RAT, SVAMP), symbolic reasoning (Last Letter, Coin Flip), and other logical reasoning tasks (Date Understanding, Tracking Shuffled Objects), without any hand-crafted few-shot examples, e.g. increasing the accuracy on MultiArith from 17.7% to 78.7% and GSM8K from 10.4% to 40.7% with large InstructGPT model (text-davinci-002), as well as similar magnitudes of improvements with another off-the-shelf large model, 540B parameter PaLM. The versatility of this single prompt across very diverse reasoning tasks hints at untapped and understudied fundamental zero-shot capabilities of LLMs, suggesting high-level, multi-task broad cognitive capabilities may be extracted by simple prompting. We hope our work not only serves as the minimal strongest zero-shot baseline for the challenging reasoning benchmarks, but also highlights the importance of carefully exploring and analyzing the enormous zero-shot knowledge hidden inside LLMs before crafting finetuning datasets or few-shot exemplars.

Submitted to arXiv on 24 May. 2022

Tools for this paper

Explain it differently 3 free rewrites left today
Export BibTeX · RIS (Zotero, Mendeley, EndNote) · Markdown (Notion, Obsidian) · Premium
Citation alerts Premium
Journal club Slides to present it Premium
For journalists Press kit and hype check Premium

Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant

You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.

⚠The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the AI assistant only knows about the paper metadata rather than the full article.

Figures and plots

Ask about a figure by number or use its question button to request visual analysis. Up to two figures and four image panels per question. Values read from plots are approximate; check the original data.

AI assistant instructions?

Assess the quality of the AI-generated content by voting

Score: 0

Why do we need votes?

Votes are used to determine whether we need to re-run our summarizing tools. If the count reaches -10, our tools can be restarted.

The previous summary was created more than a year ago and can be re-run (if necessary) by clicking on the Run button below.

⚠The license of this specific paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the summarizing tools will be run using the paper metadata rather than the full article. However, it still does a good job, and you can also try our tools on papers with more open licenses.

Similar papers summarized with our AI tools

Navigate through even more similar papers through a

tree representation

Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.