Unverified50% confidenceFactExact time
For general-purpose models, COT needs to be written explicitly into the prompt; for reasoning models, COT has been internalized as implicit thinking and requires no user guidance.
1
Sources
50%
Confidence
Medium-term (~90 days)
Relevance
10/24/2026
First Seen
Valid until: 1/22/2027
Sources
Related Entities
Related Claims
UnverifiedThe classic implementation of CoT is few-shot prompting: give the model a few "question—step-by-step reasoning—answer" examples, and the model imitates this format.75% similarVerifiedBefore ReAct was proposed, the industry mainly relied on Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompts to guide models in step-by-step reasoning, but CoT's reasoning process could not invoke external tools or perceive execution results midway.74% similarUnverifiedEven if CoT's hypothesis class covers the recursive rules, the model will choose the shortcut rather than the truth due to simplicity bias.74% similarUnverifiedCoT prompting, without changing the model architecture, acts as an implicit working memory buffer by explicitly writing the intermediate reasoning process into the output sequence, thereby improving reasoning depth; but its limitation is that once the reasoning chain is generated it cannot be modified, and errors propagate and amplify along the chain.73% similarUnverifiedEven with chain-of-thought (CoT) prompting, models still cannot stably ignore irrelevant images, demonstrating that making a model explain its reasoning is not equivalent to making it comply with annotation constraints.71% similar
Cite This Claim
Stable URI
https://kongchang.com/claim/1092420API
curl https://kongchang.com/api/v1/knowledge/claims/1092420MCP
get_claim(id=1092420)