The paper introduces RECAP, a redundancy-aware credit assignment method that improves reasoning efficiency in large language models by assigning credit to each reasoning step based on its downstream role and contribution to the correct answer. RECAP uses a semantic dependency graph to measure structural responsibility and evaluates step efficacy via changes in gold-answer log-likelihood, enabling step-specific updates without requiring a separate reward model or concise trajectories. Experiments on two 7B models across four mathematical reasoning benchmarks show that RECAP enhances the accuracy-efficiency trade-off, boosting pass@1 by 2.0–3.7 percentage points while cutting reasoning tokens by 8–31% compared to GRPO.
By Yuqing Zhou, Hong Wang, Manqing Mao, Zhuoer Wang, Samson Koelle, Jie Yuan, Yanjun Lin, James Feng, Nikki Lijing Kuang, Ziwei Zhu, Wei Niu
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: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.
By Nikolaus Holzer, William Fishell, Baishakhi Ray, Mark Santolucito
The paper introduces DCFA, a training‑free framework for attributing failures in large language model‑based multi‑agent systems. DCFA uses a global module to build causal‑inspired dependency graphs from system traces, pinpointing the earliest decisive error, and a local module that refines this attribution through counterfactual reasoning. Experiments on the Who&When benchmark across six LLMs demonstrate that DCFA improves step‑level accuracy by up to 8.27% over existing baselines.
By Zehao Wang, Lanjun Wang, Shilong Jin, Junjie Chen, Yanghua Xiao
arXiv:2602. 13904v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning is fundamental to modern LLM architectures and represents a critical intervention point for AI safety.
By Manqing Liu, David Williams-King, Ida Caspary, Linh Le, Hannes Whittingham, Puria Radmard, Cameron Tice, Edward James Young
arXiv:2607. 07492v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Many reasoning tasks are not well described by a single left-to-right chain: a solver may need to pursue a plausible branch, observe delayed failure, and return to the latest prefix that can still be completed.
By Dmitry Beresnev, Vladimir Makharev, Roman Khalikov, Ivan Oseledets, Petr Anokhin
arXiv:2608. 05124v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Long context reasoning in large language models (LLMs) is usually constrained by the fact that a single inference trajectory has to simultaneously explore the context, store intermediate state, verify evidence, and produce the final answer.
By Purbesh Mitra, Sennur Ulukus
arXiv:2602. 18905v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated strong capabilities in complex reasoning tasks, yet their decision-making processes remain difficult to interpret.
By Yujiao Yang
ThinkFuse is a training‑free test‑time fusion framework designed for small reasoning models (SRMs). It selectively intervenes in unreliable reasoning segments by comparing segment‑level uncertainty shifts with trajectory‑level uncertainty trends, and fuses auxiliary reasoning paths into the primary model’s trajectory. Experiments show ThinkFuse outperforms baselines on mathematical and knowledge‑intensive benchmarks, requires fewer fusion triggers, and generates fewer tokens, demonstrating efficient selective triggering.
By Myunghoon Kang, Jungseob Lee, Jaehyung Seo, Heuiseok 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
arXiv:2607. 23019v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Chain-of-thought (CoT) prompting enables large language models (LLMs) to tackle multi-step reasoning tasks, yet the generated intermediate steps are not guaranteed to be logically sound.
By Zirong Chen, Meiyi Ma
The paper introduces a neuro‑symbolic framework for scientific reasoning that separates symbolic validity and semantic groundedness. A deterministic symbolic verifier acts as a hard filter to guarantee syntactic and arithmetic correctness, while a Process Reward Model (PRM) is trained on verifier‑accepted steps to assess contextual grounding. The authors propose Counterfactual Symbolic Perturbation (CSP) to generate hard negative examples that pass the verifier but are logically flawed, enabling efficient PRM training and a verifier‑first constrained search at inference.
By Yuxin Zi, Cong Xu, Suparna Bhattacharya, Martin Foltin, Amit Sheth