A comparison of chain-of-thought reasoning strategies across datasets and models

Abstract

Emergent chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning capabilities promise to improve the performance and explainability of large language models (LLMs). However, uncertainties remain about how reasoning strategies formulated for previous model generations generalize to new model generations and different datasets. In this small-scale study, we compare different reasoning strategies induced by zero-shot prompting across six recently released LLMs (davinci-002, davinci-003, GPT-3.5-turbo, GPT-4, Flan-T5-xxl and Cohere command-xlarge). We test them on six question-answering datasets that require real-world knowledge application and logical verbal reasoning, including datasets from scientific and medical domains. Our findings demonstrate that while some variations in effectiveness occur, gains from CoT reasoning strategies remain robust across different models and datasets. GPT-4 benefits the most from current state-of-the-art reasoning strategies and performs best by applying a prompt previously discovered through automated discovery.