Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

StrategyLLM: Large Language Models as Strategy Generators, Executors, Optimizers, and Evaluators for Problem Solving

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2311.08803 v4 pith:HJANHMBE submitted 2023-11-15 cs.CL

StrategyLLM: Large Language Models as Strategy Generators, Executors, Optimizers, and Evaluators for Problem Solving

classification cs.CL
keywords reasoningrightarrowstrategyllmacrossstrategiestaskapplicableconsistency
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

Most existing prompting methods suffer from the issues of generalizability and consistency, as they often rely on instance-specific solutions that may not be applicable to other instances and lack task-level consistency across the selected few-shot examples. To address these limitations, we propose a comprehensive framework, StrategyLLM, allowing LLMs to perform inductive reasoning, deriving general strategies from specific task instances, and deductive reasoning, applying these general strategies to particular task examples, for constructing generalizable and consistent few-shot prompts. It employs four LLM-based agents: strategy generator, executor, optimizer, and evaluator, working together to generate, evaluate, and select promising strategies for a given task. Experimental results demonstrate that StrategyLLM outperforms the competitive baseline CoT-SC that requires human-annotated solutions on 13 datasets across 4 challenging tasks without human involvement, including math reasoning (34.2\% $\rightarrow$ 38.8\%), commonsense reasoning (70.3\% $\rightarrow$ 72.5\%), algorithmic reasoning (73.7\% $\rightarrow$ 85.0\%), and symbolic reasoning (30.0\% $\rightarrow$ 79.2\%). Further analysis reveals that StrategyLLM is applicable to various LLMs and demonstrates advantages across numerous scenarios.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Parallel Decoder Transformer: Planner-Conditioned Latent Coordination for Model-Intrinsic Parallel Generation

    cs.AI 2025-12 reject novelty 5.0

    A Parallel Decoder Transformer architecture for multi-lane parallel text generation is proposed, but the paper's own evidence is incomplete and internally contradictory.

  2. A Survey on LLM-as-a-Judge

    cs.CL 2024-11 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    A survey on LLM-as-a-Judge that reviews reliability strategies, proposes evaluation methods, and introduces a novel benchmark for assessing such systems.