arXiv AI
Jul 14
Filtered Reasoning Score: Evaluating Reasoning Quality on a Model's Most-Confident Traces
arXiv:2604. 11996v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Should we trust Large Language Models (LLMs) with high accuracy?
Reasoning Jury: Multi-Model Consensus for Evaluating Reasoning Traces
arXiv:2608. 12585v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Improving reasoning LLMs requires the ability to judge the quality of long reasoning traces for effective reasoning data curation, strong training signals during reinforcement learning, and an in-depth understanding of reasoning behaviors during model performance evaluation.
Related stories
arXiv AI
Jun 15
C2-Faith: Benchmarking LLM Judges for Causal and Coverage Faithfulness in Chain-of-Thought Reasoning
arXiv:2603. 05167v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as judges of chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning, yet it remains unclear whether they can reliably assess process faithfulness rather than merely answer plausibility.
arXiv AI
Jul 1
Modality-Driven Search with Holistic Trace Judging for ARC-AGI-2
arXiv:2606. 31543v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models can produce fluent, internally coherent reasoning traces for abstract reasoning tasks while still being confidently wrong - making selection among candidates, not just generation, the central challenge.
arXiv AI
Jul 14
LLMs as a Jury: Cross-Model Consensus Can Outperform Process Reward Models for LLM Reasoning
arXiv:2607. 10139v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Selecting the correct answer from a pool of candidate reasoning chains is the engine of test-time scaling, yet the standard selectors each carry a cost: self-consistency inherits the errors of the single model it resamples, and trained reward models need labeled data and transfer poorly off-distribution.
arXiv AI
Jun 2
Off-the-Shelf LLMs as Process Scorers: Training-Free Alternative to PRMs for Mathematical Reasoning
arXiv:2606. 01682v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Selecting the best response from multiple small-model samples using a stronger scorer is a simple inference-time strategy, but fails when the small model has already committed to incorrect reasoning paths.
Hugging Face Trending Papers
Jun 1
Off-the-Shelf LLMs as Process Scorers: Training-Free Alternative to PRMs for Mathematical Reasoning
Selecting the best response from multiple small-model samples using a stronger scorer is a simple inference-time strategy, but fails when the small model has already committed to incorrect reasoning paths. PRM guided search avoids this by scoring candidate continuations during generation, but requires a reward model trained with step-level labels.
Hugging Face Trending Papers
Jun 25
Reasoning Quality Emerges Early: Data Curation for Reasoning Models
Supervised fine-tuning (SFT) on a small, high-quality set of long reasoning traces is an effective approach for eliciting strong reasoning capabilities in Large Language Models (LLMs). However, existing methods for curating high-quality SFT data rely heavily on strong reasoning models to filter examples based on diversity and difficulty, making the curation process costly while often yielding suboptimal data quality.
arXiv Machine Learning
Jul 31
Reasoning Consensus: Structural Ensembling of LLM Reasoning via Weighted DAG Aggregation
arXiv:2607. 27783v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) explore problems through chain-of-thought, but this exploration is buried in unstructured prose.
arXiv AI
Aug 11
TempoBench: Reasoning Execution Without Causal Attribution Is Just Simulation
arXiv:2510. 27544v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Current training paradigms, optimized for long-horizon reasoning trace execution, have made Large Language Models (LLMs) excel at pattern matching and forward simulation of reasoning, but underperform at counterfactual causal understanding and reasoning.
arXiv Machine Learning
Jun 26
Reasoning Quality Emerges Early: Data Curation for Reasoning Models
arXiv:2606. 26797v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Supervised fine-tuning (SFT) on a small, high-quality set of long reasoning traces is an effective approach for eliciting strong reasoning capabilities in Large Language Models (LLMs).
arXiv AI
Aug 5
When Many Answers Are Valid, Voting Fails: Symbolic Verification for Best-of-K Causal Reasoning in LLMs
arXiv:2608. 03506v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Self-consistency assumes the most frequent answer among sampled reasoning traces is the most reliable, but this can fail in causal reasoning: samples often repeat the same confounding error, and votes fragment across multiple valid answers, letting an invalid answer win despite a valid minority trace.
arXiv AI
Jun 9
Correct Is Not Enough: Training Reasoning Planners with Executor-Grounded Rewards
arXiv:2605. 03862v4 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards has become a common way to improve explicit reasoning in large language models, but final-answer correctness alone does not reveal whether the reasoning trace is faithful, reliable, or useful to the model that consumes it.