Some methods adopt ranking, such as Cobbe et al. (2021), which trains a verifier to select high-confidence reasoning chains through ranking. Meanwhile, other methods select reasoning chains through a voting mechanism. Self-consistency Wang et al. (2023) selects the most consistent answer by majority voting among sampled reasoning chains based on final answers. Furthermore, Fu et al. (2023) proposes Complex CoT, which utilizes a complexity-based voting strategy that leans towards selecting answers generated by more complex reasoning chains. However, answer-based voting mechanisms do not take into account the correctness of reasoning chains. Miao et al. (2023) takes the reasoning steps into account when voting, which can obtain both consistent answers and trustworthy reasoning processes simultaneously. Moreover, to consider the relations between intermediate steps across chains, Yoran et al. (2023) mixes information between reasoning chains and selects the most relevant facts to perform meta-reason over multiple reasoning chains. GRACE Khalifa et al. (2023) trains a discriminator through contrastive learning and uses this discriminator to rank each intermediate reasoning step. Previous methods sample based on the probability distribution, while Diversity-of-Thought Naik et al. (2023) obtains multiple reasoning paths by prompting with different instructions.