Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting can enhance the reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs), establishing itself as a primary approach to solving complex reasoning tasks. Existing CoT synthesis approaches usually focus on simpler reasoning tasks and thus result in low-quality and inconsistent CoT prompts. In response to this challenge, we present an empirical investigation of CoT prompting and introduce CoTGenius, a novel framework designed for the automatic generation of superior CoT prompts. CoTGenius is developed based on three major evolution strategies, i.e., complicate, diversify, and specify—alongside two filtering mechanisms: evolutionary success judgement and correctness verification. We further employ CoTGenius to create an extensive CoT dataset, and subsequently fine-tune the Llama 2-Chat 7B and 13B models on this dataset. We call the resulting model ChainLM. To deal with the cumulative error issue in reasoning steps, we propose a step-level debating method, wherein multiple debaters discuss each reasoning step to arrive at the correct answer. Extensive experiments demonstrate that our ChainLM models exhibit enhanced proficiency in addressing a spectrum of complex reasoning problems compared to existing models. In addition, we conduct an in-depth analysis of the impact of data categories within CoTGenius on the model performance. We release our dataset and code at https://github.com/RUCAIBox/ChainLM.

Large language models (LLMs), such as ChatGPT, are prone to generate hallucinations, i.e., content that conflicts with the source or cannot be verified by the factual knowledge. To understand what types of content and to which extent LLMs are apt to hallucinate, we introduce the Hallucination Evaluation for Large Language Models (HaluEval) benchmark, a large collection of generated and human-annotated hallucinated samples for evaluating the performance of LLMs in recognizing hallucination. To generate these samples, we propose a ChatGPT-based two-step framework, i.e., sampling-then-filtering. Besides, we also hire some human labelers to annotate the hallucinations in ChatGPT responses. The empirical results suggest that ChatGPT is likely to generate hallucinated content in specific topics by fabricating unverifiable information (i.e., about 19.5% user queries). Moreover, existing LLMs face great challenges in recognizing the hallucinations in texts. While, our experiments also prove that the hallucination recognition can be improved by providing external knowledge or adding reasoning steps.