arXiv Machine Learning

Exploring Extrinsic and Intrinsic Properties for Effective Reasoning with Code Interpreter

arXiv:2606. 16934v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Reasoning with a Code Interpreter (CI) has emerged as an effective paradigm for enhancing the reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs) through executable computation and iterative verification.

arXiv Machine Learning
2d ago

RATIO: Reasoning Analysis and Token-level Inference Optimization for Quantized Reasoning Models

The paper introduces RATIO, a framework for improving quantized reasoning models by identifying overthinking tokens and applying token-specific penalties. It uses Quantization-aware Reasoning Behavior Analysis to detect problematic tokens and Token-Specific Penalty Determination to assign penalties without extra training. Experiments show RATIO outperforms existing methods, boosting accuracy by up to 9.8 points and shortening chain-of-thought length by up to 51.3%.

By Chengzhu Bao, Xianglong Yan, Tianao Zhang, Jiaqi Chen, Shaoqiu Zhang, Yulun Zhang
arXiv AI
Sep 16

The Imitation Game: When LLMs Learn to Reason Like Programs via Code-Centric Reasoning Data Synthesis

The paper introduces MIMIC, a framework that uses executable code to generate rigorous reasoning data for large language models (LLMs). By converting algorithms into verifiable reasoning trajectories through narrative fusion, code-guided test synthesis, and dynamic code instrumentation, MIMIC creates a Code-Instrumented Reward (CIR) that supplies dense, high‑fidelity supervision for reinforcement learning. Models trained with MIMIC’s synthetic dataset show significant, consistent improvements in general reasoning, complex mathematics, and fine‑grained deterministic tasks.

By Jinyang Zhang, Weibin Liao, Keqin Bao, Sihang Li, Shaobo Wang, Muyang Ye, Hongxin Ding, Yue Fang, Tianyi Tang, Fei Huang, Kexin Yang, Xingzhang Ren, Dayiheng Liu
arXiv Machine Learning
Aug 31

Beyond Output Correctness: Benchmarking and Evaluating Large Language Model Reasoning in Coding Tasks

The paper introduces CodeRQ-Bench, the first benchmark for assessing large language model reasoning quality across coding tasks such as generation, summarization, and classification. It analyzes over a thousand mismatches from existing evaluators, identifies recurring limitations, and derives design insights that lead to a new two‑stage evaluator, VERA. Experiments show VERA outperforms strong baselines, improving AUCROC by up to 0.26 and AUPRC by up to 0.21 on four datasets.

By Yuangang Li, Justin Tian Jin Chen, Ethan Yu, David Hong, Iftekhar Ahmed
arXiv Machine Learning
Jun 16

Pushing the Boundaries of Natural Reasoning: Interleaved Bonus from Formal-Logic Verification

arXiv:2601. 22642v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) show remarkable capabilities, yet their stochastic next-token prediction creates logical inconsistencies and reward hacking that formal symbolic systems avoid.

By Chuxue Cao, Jinluan Yang, Haoran Li, Kunhao Pan, Zijian Zhao, Zhengyu Chen, Yuchen Tian, Lijun Wu, Conghui He, Sirui Han, Yike Guo
arXiv AI
Jun 30

Beyond Scaling Law: A Data-Efficient Distillation Framework for Reasoning

arXiv:2508. 09883v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) demonstrate remarkable reasoning capabilities in tasks such as algorithmic coding and mathematical problem-solving.

By Xiaojun Wu, Xiaoguang Jiang, Huiyang Li, Jucai Zhai, Dengfeng Liu, Qiaobo Hao, Huang Liu, Zhiguo Yang, Ji Xie, Ninglun Gu, Jin Yang, Kailai Zhang, Yelun Bao, Jun Wang
arXiv AI
Sep 24

PotARCin: Multi-Dimensional Evaluation of Skill Acquisition in Abstract Reasoning Tasks

PotARCin expands the ARC benchmark by evaluating abstract reasoning across five dimensions—Definition, Classification, Constrained Generation, Editing, and Inversion—using programmatic generation of new task instances. The study shows a 25‑52 percentage‑point performance gap between standard ARC evaluation and PotARCin, and reveals that multi‑dimensional assessment can reorder models that appear equivalent under single‑metric accuracy. Additionally, a new held‑out set, P‑ARC, demonstrates low model accuracy (1‑8%) across all dimensions, highlighting the need for more comprehensive tests of abstract reasoning.

By Claas Beger, Ryan Yi, Melanie Mitchell