arXiv:2609.37304v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Large reasoning models improve performance on challenging problems by allocating additional computation before answering, but longer reasoning does not...
By Zhibin Wen, Tao Han, Lei Bai, Can Li, Yang Xu
arXiv:2510. 19990v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: The reasoning paradigm, where language models reason before answering, has enabled breakthroughs on tasks such as mathematical problem-solving.
By Zachary Horvitz, Raghav Singhal, Hao Zou, Carles Domingo-Enrich, Zhou Yu, Rajesh Ranganath, Kathleen McKeown
The paper introduces a two‑level internal readout for mixture‑of‑experts reasoning models. First, it compresses the model’s reasoning states into a 64‑axis semantic frame (J64) that reveals process states not captured by the emitted trace, improving held‑out AUC by 0.096–0.135. Second, it reconstructs this frame from native expert‑routing statistics (R64), achieving high correlation with J64 and preserving most of its predictive gain while enabling low‑overhead, test‑time decision making and improved routing policies.
arXiv:2607. 11266v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting has significantly advanced the reasoning capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs), yet it often incurs substantial computational costs due to over-reasoning: the generation of redundant, verbose, or irrelevant steps.
By Daeyeop Lee, Hwanjo Yu
The paper introduces a two‑level readout for mixture‑of‑experts reasoning models. First, it compresses the model’s internal reasoning states into a 64‑dimensional semantic frame (J64) that reveals process dynamics beyond the emitted trace. Second, it reconstructs this frame from native expert‑routing statistics (R64), achieving high correlation and preserving most predictive gains while enabling low‑overhead, test‑time decision making.
By Kang Chen, Sihan Zhao, Yixin Cao, Yugang Jiang
arXiv:2606. 11445v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Trust in an AI system is often anchored by explanations of how it works, which one then uses to forecast its behavior on new inputs.
By Mosh Levy, Yoav Goldberg, Asa Cooper Stickland
arXiv:2609.16055v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Test-time compute has emerged as a major approach to improving the capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs). However, existing test-time reasonin...
By Zhiren Gong, Yikun Hou, Zihao Zeng, Ming Xiao, Chau Yuen, Wei Yang Bryan Lim
TRACES (Tagging Reasoning Steps for Adaptive Cost‑Efficient Early‑Stopping) is a lightweight framework that tags reasoning steps of large‑language models in real time, enabling adaptive, cost‑efficient early stopping during inference. By monitoring the types of steps generated, the method identifies when models shift their reasoning after arriving at a correct answer, allowing for interpretable stopping criteria. Experiments on mathematical reasoning benchmarks (MATH500, GSM8K, AIME) and knowledge benchmarks (MMLU, GPQA) show token reductions of 20–50% while preserving accuracy, with more conservative thresholds needed for harder tasks such as BeyondAIME and IMO AnswerBench.
By Yannis Belkhiter, Seshu Tirupathi, Giulio Zizzo, John D. Kelleher
The paper introduces Step-wise Truncation Probing (STP) to measure overthinking in reasoning models by generating answers from multiple retained prefixes along a fixed reasoning trajectory. It defines Overthinking Ratio and Accuracy Degradation to quantify the impact of continued reasoning beyond the point of maximum accuracy. Using STP data, the authors construct token‑accuracy Pareto frontiers for various termination strategies and present OTBench, a benchmark that aggregates 70.5 B reasoning tokens across six models and four benchmark groups.
By Weixin Guan, Liang Li, Shiyu Xie, Jiapeng Liu, Bing Li, Peng Fu, Chengyang Fang, Xiaoshuai Hao, Can Ma, Weiping Wang
The paper proposes a unified framework for test‑time reasoning methods, framing them as recursion operators—GROW, PRUNE, and BRANCH—applied to an agent’s reasoning trace. Experiments across five benchmarks and three frontier models show that BRANCH, which samples and selects among multiple reasoning paths, consistently outperforms the other operators and a single‑pass chain‑of‑thought baseline, improving accuracy by an average of 5.98 percentage points. The study also highlights the importance of paired evaluation and careful handling of scoring‑pipeline failures, as these factors can significantly alter comparative outcomes.
By Shengxin Zhang, Xiaomin Wu, Xiyang Wu, Jing Xie
arXiv:2607. 18100v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Extended reasoning has become standard for frontier Large Language Models (LLMs), yet the trajectories these models produce remain largely uncontrollable.
By Sheldon Yu, Tong Yu, Xunyi Jiang, Rohan Surana, Gagan Mundada, Sungchul Kim, Lina Yao, Julian McAuley, Junda Wu
arXiv:2610.00571v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Large reasoning models (LRMs) have achieved substantial improvements in solving complex mathematical problems, but often produce lengthy, repetitive,...
By Barproda Halder, Qiuyi Zhang, Sanghamitra Dutta