Self-consistency prompting is a technique that's aimed at enhancing the quality of outputs from AI models by leveraging the model's ability to check its own answers. Originally proposed by Wang et al. (2022)https://arxiv.org/abs/2203.11171, self-consistency aims "to replace the naive greedy decoding used in chain-of-thought prompting". Think of it like a student cross-referencing their own exam answers to ensure they haven't contradicted themselves. By prompting the AI model in a manner that encourages it to review and validate its own outputs, this technique aims to boost consistency and reduce errors in the model's responses.

The concept of "naive greedy decoding" in chain-of-thought prompting refers to the model's tendency to follow the most probable path of generating text based on its training, without the ability to reconsider or reflect on its choices. This approach, while efficient, can lead to errors or inconsistencies, as the model may not adequately consider alternative interpretations or solutions.

In contrast, self-consistency prompting works by encouraging the AI to generate multiple answers or explanations for a given query, and then cross-examine these to determine the most consistent and logical response. This method is like having the model perform an internal peer review, where it challenges and verifies its initial conclusions.

By doing so, self-consistency reduces the likelihood of errors that can occur due to the linear and one-directional nature of greedy decoding. The AI model is no longer just following the path of highest immediate probability. Instead, it takes a step back to evaluate the broader context and coherence of its responses. This shift from a single, immediate decision-making process to a more reflective and evaluative approach marks a significant enhancement in the model's ability to provide accurate and reliable outputs.

The mechanics of self-consistency

The rationale behind self-consistency is rooted in the idea that a complex reasoning problem often has multiple valid pathways leading to the same correct answer. By generating several reasoning paths and identifying the most common outcome, the likelihood of arriving at an accurate conclusion increases significantly.

The process revolves around providing the model with multiple reasoning paths or diverse perspectives on a given problem. By doing so, the AI is nudged to consider these various viewpoints and evaluate its own reasoning critically.

A simple workflow for self-consistency might look like this:

  1. Prompt generation: The process begins with creating a prompt that clearly defines the problem or question for the AI model.

  2. Chain of thought reasoning: The AI model is then prompted to generate a chain of thought, detailing its reasoning process step-by-step.

  3. Multiple iterations: The same prompt is used to generate multiple reasoning paths. This is where the self-consistency approach diverges from standard CoT prompting.

  4. Analysis of outcomes: The responses are analyzed to identify the most consistently occurring answer or reasoning path.

  5. Selection of the final answer: The answer that appears most frequently across different iterations is selected as the final response.

Examples of self-consistency in practice

Here are two examples of how this technique could be used.

Example 1: Email classification

Imagine a software company receiving numerous emails daily, needing to classify them as important or not. An email stating a major security vulnerability would be put through the self-consistency process:

  • The email is presented multiple times as a prompt to the AI model.

  • Each iteration might yield different classifications (IMPORTANT or NOT IMPORTANT) and reasoning.

  • The majority classification is considered the final decision, ensuring a more reliable assessment of the email's importance.

Example 2: Product analysis

Consider a scenario where a customer is looking for the best money-saving option for buying eggs, with specific preferences such as cage-free, grade AA, and a certain count range. The self-consistency approach would involve:

  • Presenting a detailed prompt with the list of products and user preferences.

  • Generating multiple responses, each time reasoning through the options.

  • Identifying the most consistent choice across iterations, leading to a reliable recommendation for the customer.

Strengths of self-consistency prompting

When applied correctly, this approach offers numerous advantages:

  • Improved accuracy: By comparing and contrasting multiple reasoning paths, AI models are more likely to produce accurate outputs.

  • Reduced bias: Encouraging AI to view problems from diverse perspectives can mitigate inherent biases.

  • Critical thinking: By self-checking, the AI is essentially exercising a form of critical thinking.

  • Robustness: This approach is particularly effective in dealing with complex problems where a single line of reasoning might not suffice.

The self-consistency technique is most suitable for tasks relating to arithmetic and commonsense reasoning.

Self-consistency vs. few-shot chain-of-thought prompting

Self-consistency and few-shot chain-of-thought are both advanced prompt engineering techniques designed to enhance the performance of AI models, but they differ significantly in their approach and application.

Self-consistency focuses on improving the model's output by having it generate multiple answers or explanations for a query, then cross-examining these to determine the most consistent and logical response. This technique, akin to an internal peer review, aims to rectify errors and inconsistencies by encouraging the model to evaluate its own reasoning critically. It's particularly useful in complex problem-solving scenarios where accuracy and consistency are paramount.

On the other hand, few-shot chain-of thought relies on providing the model with a small number of examples that illustrate the reasoning process needed to solve a particular type of problem. This method helps the model understand the context and steps required to reach a conclusion, acting as a guide to approach similar problems.

Few-shot chain-of-thought is particularly effective in teaching the model how to handle tasks or queries that are similar to the examples provided, making it a powerful tool for specialized tasks or domains. While self-consistency emphasizes internal validation and error correction, few-shot chain of thought focuses on teaching the model a specific reasoning process through examples.

Try it out

Try asking ChatGPT some questions using the technique of self-consistency.

Here is one prompt to try: "A farmer has a certain amount of money to buy exactly 100 animals at a market. Chickens cost $0.50 each, goats are $3.50 each, and cows are $10 each. How many of each animal must the farmer buy to use all the money and have exactly 100 animals?"

Follow the steps of self-consistency using the prompt above. First, input the prompt into the AI model several times to get different solutions. Next, look for the most consistently occurring answer across the responses. Finally, evaluate how self-consistency helped in arriving at a more reliable solution.

You can try on the ChatGPT simulator or directly on the main site.

Note: This app uses the GPT 3.5 model. If you want to try a different model, visit chat.openai.com.

Get hands-on with 1400+ tech skills courses.