arXiv AI

Which Tokens Should SFT Actually Learn? A Token-Trimming Perspective on Mathematical Reasoning

The paper introduces Trimmed Logit-Gap SFT (TrimSFT), a token-level reweighting strategy that adjusts supervised fine-tuning loss based on the logit gap between the correct token and its strongest competitor. TrimSFT trims supervision from tokens that are either already mastered (large logit gap) or poorly supported (small or negative logit gap), focusing learning on tokens with intermediate logit gaps. Experiments on six base models across five mathematical reasoning benchmarks show that TrimSFT consistently outperforms standard SFT, achieving the best average performance on five of six models and up to +26.9 points on MATH500.

arXiv AI
Sep 7

Extremely Sparse Supervision Incentivizes Reasoning Ability

The paper reports that in on‑policy distillation for large language models, reasoning performance can be improved by supervising only a tiny fraction of generated tokens—sometimes just one or two tokens per reasoning trajectory, about 0.05% of all tokens. This sparse supervision consistently matches or exceeds full‑token training across nine teacher‑student setups on mathematical reasoning, and is also validated on coding reasoning, Llama models, and PPO‑based reinforcement learning with verifiable reward. The findings suggest that effective post‑training does not require token‑intensive supervision and may align more closely with natural learning processes that focus on critical reasoning steps.

By Zhishuai Liu, Xingzi Xu, Mehmet Saygin Seyfioglu, Pan Xu, Karim Bouyarmane
arXiv AI
Jul 28

DeepLook: Deeper Thinking with Lookahead

arXiv:2607. 22602v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Inference-time scaling has emerged as a powerful paradigm for improving large language model reasoning, often delivering larger gains on difficult reasoning tasks than parameter scaling alone.

By Tingxin Yang, Zefeng Wang, Mengyue Wang, Xingcheng Zhou, Yunpu Ma
arXiv AI
Jul 24

From Noise to Diversity: Random Embedding Injection in LLM Reasoning

arXiv:2605. 11936v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Recent soft prompt research has tried to improve reasoning by inserting trained vectors into LLM inputs, yet whether the gain comes from the learned content or from the act of injection itself has not been carefully separated.

By Heejun Kim, Seungpil Lee, Jewon Yeom, Jaewon Sok, Seonghyeon Park, Jeongjae Park, Taesup Kim, Sundong Kim
arXiv AI
Jun 19

Beyond Entropy: Learning from Token-Level Distributional Deviations for LLM Reasoning

arXiv:2606. 19771v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) has significantly advanced Large Language Model (LLM) reasoning; however, it faces a fundamental optimization instability: uniform token updates precipitate entropy collapse, leading to premature convergence to suboptimal strategies, whereas excessive Shannon Entropy maximization can cause entropy explosion, driving blind exploration toward incoherent reasoning chains.

By Xuanzhi Feng, Zhengyang Li, Zeyu Liu, Haoxi Li, Yuming Jiang, Bing Guo, Jingcai Guo, Jie Zhang, Song Guo
arXiv Machine Learning
Sep 2

Online Self-Weighted Fine-Tuning

Online Self-Weighted Fine‑Tuning (OSW‑FT) augments standard supervised fine‑tuning by adding online, trajectory‑level weighting: for each query the model estimates its current success rate from a small number of inference‑only rollouts and rescales the SFT loss accordingly. The method keeps the optimization direction anchored to the expert trajectory while adapting the update magnitude online, and it is shown to be unbiased for any finite rollout count with a convergence analysis. Across Qwen3 models from 0.6B to 4B, OSW‑FT consistently outperforms plain SFT on challenging benchmarks such as AIME, achieving a favorable compute‑performance trade‑off with only two online rollouts.

By Haiquan Wen, Yiwei He, Bei Peng, Guangliang Cheng
arXiv AI
Aug 21

Learning When to Think: Adaptive Reasoning for Test-Time Compute Allocation

arXiv:2608. 20256v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Reasoning language models trained with reinforcement learning typically operate under a fixed token budget rather than an explicitly adaptive one, which can lead to over-computation on easy problems and insufficient computation on difficult ones.

By Gijs Kassenaar, Zhao Yang, Vincent Fran\c{c}ois-Lavet