Overview › 7Orchestration › c.Scaling compute
Scaling compute
Spend extra compute only where it pays. 7 optimizations.
- i.
Reflection loop
The same model critiques and revises its own output for a few rounds (Self-Refine), or after a failed attempt writes a short lesson it carries into the next try (Reflexion).
- ii.
Self-critique evaluator loop
Train or tune the system's own judge from its own outputs and synthetic judgments (contrastive pairs with one side deliberately degraded, the judge's own verdicts kept only where they match the construction label) instead of human labels, then use it to score, select or train in the loop.
- iii.
Evaluator-optimizer loop
A separate evaluator (an LLM judge with written criteria, a different model, or an agent that tests the running app) scores the generator's output and returns specific findings; the generator revises until the output passes or a round cap is hit.
- iv.
Graph-of-Thought
Graph-of-Thought runs one task as a graph of model calls: split the input into parts, generate and score several candidates per part, keep the best, then merge the partial results and refine the merged answer.
- v.
Language Agent Tree Search (LATS)
Language Agent Tree Search runs the agent as a Monte Carlo tree search over its own actions: sample several next actions, execute each in the environment, score the resulting states with the model, reflect on failed endings, and back the scores up the tree until a branch succeeds or the budget runs out.
- vi.
Multi-agent debate
Several model instances answer the same question, read each other's answers and revise over one or more rounds, and a vote or judge settles the final answer.
- vii.
Tree-of-Thought
Tree-of-Thought replaces one reasoning chain with a search: the model proposes several next steps, an evaluator (the model itself, a trained verifier or a rule check) scores the partial solutions, and breadth-first or depth-first search keeps the best or backtracks.
See also
- 9.c.ii
Spend extra samples before extra verification: parallel attempts with a vote or judge; verify only where it pays
Running several independent attempts and picking by majority vote or a judge raised accuracy (Genie 73.8% to 81.4% with 8 runs, at up to 2.1x cost).