Invariant-Measure Reasoners (ImR) introduce a stable representation for latent reasoning models by using an invariant measure that captures the long‑run distribution of latent states on a compact subset of the state space. Unlike traditional approaches that predict from a single latent state, ImR predicts from the expectation of the prediction head’s output under this invariant measure, thereby reducing prediction instability across recurrent depths. Experiments on maze and Sudoku tasks show that both fine‑tuning and training from scratch with ImR improve accuracy and allow models to exploit non‑fixed‑point dynamics that were previously destabilizing.
Latent reasoning models repeatedly update a latent state using the same recurrent block. As the recurrent depth increases, the sequence of latent states may converge to a compact subset of the state s...
arXiv:2608.24136v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Recurrent models, which repeatedly update latent states with shared computation blocks, have emerged as powerful architectures for solving complex reas...
Latent Recurrent Thoughts (LRT) proposes a method for reasoning with frozen large language models by operating in the model’s continuous representation space. A small auxiliary network generates initial latent vectors, which a tiny recurrent reasoner refines over multiple steps, decoupling computational depth from model size. Experiments on symbolic and natural‑language reasoning tasks show that LRT outperforms prior frozen‑decoder continuous‑space methods and chain‑of‑thought prompting while using far less inference compute.
arXiv:2606. 29164v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Latent reasoning models perform multi-step inference directly in hidden-state space, yet the structure of these latent reasoning trajectories remains poorly understood.
LatentHarness unifies memory access and latent reasoning by treating them as sequential latent actions—THINK, RECALL, and EXIT—within a language model. It is trained via counterfactual policy distillation, which evaluates the impact of each action on the emitted token and learns when to recall evidence versus continue reasoning. On six long‑context reasoning benchmarks, a 1.4B‑parameter LatentHarness model outperforms the strongest baselines by 2.8% and 10.0% relative, while running 5.9× faster than the leading long‑context baseline.
arXiv:2609.22228v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models increasingly rely on long chain-of-thought (CoT) trajectories for complex reasoning, but autoregressive generation brings subst...
arXiv:2610.18547v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: People often tackle difficult problems by thinking more deeply or exploring more possibilities. Similarly, recursive reasoners, which reason by repeate...
arXiv:2608. 13570v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Latent reasoning has emerged as a powerful alternative to text-based Chain-of-Thought (CoT), offering significant gains in computational efficiency by compressing verbose reasoning into compact embeddings.
The paper introduces LLoCoT, a looped latent‑reasoning framework that replaces the traditional left‑to‑right generation of chain‑of‑thought tokens with iterative refinement of a compact latent workspace using a shared transformer. By jointly updating latent slots over a few iterations and sampling latent tokens in parallel, LLoCoT feeds these into an autoregressive decoder for answer generation. Experiments on HumanEval and MBPP show that LLoCoT matches or surpasses explicit‑CoT baselines while dramatically reducing reasoning latency and increasing throughput.
arXiv:2606. 00726v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Strong reasoning depends not only on model knowledge but also on how effectively cognitive behaviors are deployed during generation.
arXiv:2607. 06648v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Latent reasoning methods perform multi-step inference entirely in the model's continuous hidden states, promising more compact and efficient reasoning.
The paper investigates how continuous latent states in large language models can store multiple reasoning steps through superposition. It challenges the intuition that retaining only the current reasoning frontier is optimal, showing that cumulative superposition of the full reasoning history can actually require fewer representational dimensions. The authors demonstrate that this approach preserves more valid evidence, improves downstream outcome discrimination, and delays unreliability, while also establishing that uniform cumulative weighting of memories is minimax‑optimal for future reasoning.