The paper investigates whether the high costs of training chain-of-thought reasoning models can be reduced through algorithmic design. It introduces an autocurriculum approach that lets the model select which problems to focus on during training, showing that this method provably improves both supervised fine‑tuning and reinforcement learning. For supervised fine‑tuning, autocurriculum requires exponentially fewer reasoning demonstrations by targeting prompts where the model struggles, while for reinforcement learning it decouples computational cost from the quality of the reference model, making the burn‑in cost nearly independent of target accuracy.
By Nived Rajaraman, Audrey Huang, Miro Dudik, Robert Schapire, Dylan J. Foster, Akshay Krishnamurthy
arXiv:2607. 26119v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large reasoning models trained via reinforcement learning (RL) have been increasingly shown to outperform their supervised fine-tuned (SFT) counterparts on mathematical reasoning tasks; Yet the mechanistic basis for this advantage remains unclear.
By Antyabha Rahman, Akshaj Gurugubelli, Omar Ankit, Kevin Zhu, Aishwarya Balwani
arXiv:2607. 16097v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Reinforcement learning (RL) has become central to improving large language models (LLMs) on complex reasoning tasks, yet RL post-training is largely studied in isolation from the pretraining that precedes it.
By Jingyan Shen, Ang Li, Salman Rahman, Yifan Sun, Micah Goldblum, Matus Telgarsky, Pavel Izmailov
arXiv:2604.17614v2 Announce Type: replace-cross
Abstract: Skills are a natural unit for describing what a language model can do and how its behavior can be changed. However, existing characterization...
By Feiyang Kang, Mahavir Dabas, Myeongseob Ko, Ruoxi Jia
Post-training Small Language Models (SLMs) for reasoning typically follows an SFT-then-RL pipeline, yet existing work rarely considers what data should be learned at each stage. We argue that data strategy should be aligned with the distinct roles of SFT and RL: SFT is better suited for acquiring not-yet-mastered reasoning skills, while RL is better suited for consolidating skills that the model can already partially access.
arXiv:2510. 19990v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: The reasoning paradigm, where language models reason before answering, has enabled breakthroughs on tasks such as mathematical problem-solving.
By Zachary Horvitz, Raghav Singhal, Hao Zou, Carles Domingo-Enrich, Zhou Yu, Rajesh Ranganath, Kathleen McKeown
arXiv:2603. 01437v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: As chain of thought (CoT) has become central to scaling reasoning capabilities in large language models (LLMs), it has also emerged as a promising tool for interpretability, suggesting the opportunity to understand model decisions through verbalized reasoning.
By Kyle Cox, Darius Kianersi, Adri\`a Garriga-Alonso
arXiv:2608.23256v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Recent work proposes next-chunk reasoning RL for leveraging no-CoT data---corpora such as worked solutions and textbook derivations that contain reason...
By Yinhao Tang, Youqing Fang, Yanan Sun, Jiangning Liu, Ziyi Wang, Xun Zhao, Weiming Zhang, Bin Liu, Kuikun Liu, Wenwei Zhang, Kai Chen
arXiv:2608. 13760v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Which reasoning behaviors are associated with correct answers in reasoning models, and does reasoning-oriented training amplify those behaviors?
By Jean de Dieu Nyandwi, Leena Mathur, Yonatan Bisk, Robert Hawkins, Graham Neubig
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.
By Gerard Grau Garc\'ia, Arnau Padr\'es Masdemont, Niccol\`o Grillo, Jordi Ros-Giralt, Arash Behboodi, Victor Conchello Vendrell
The paper argues that pattern recognition and step‑by‑step reasoning lie on a spectrum, with large language models (LLMs) learning the latter when the next token depends on only a few preceding tokens. It formalises reasoning traces as paths on a De Bruijn graph, showing that the number of edges is far smaller than the number of possible traces, making step‑by‑step reasoning sample‑efficient. Experiments fine‑tuning Qwen2.5‑1.5B‑Instruct demonstrate that a moderate density of states balances accuracy and robustness, and that real‑world models like Qwen3 retain most of their performance even when attention is limited to a small sliding window.
By Amrut Nadgir, Pratik Chaudhari, Vijay Balasubramanian
BoundaryEvo introduces a two‑stage data‑model co‑evolution framework for distilling long‑chain reasoning from large teacher models into small language models. First, Capability Priming distills a small set of teacher trajectories to give the student an initial reasoning baseline. Then, Capability‑Boundary Co‑Evolution iteratively selects questions the student has not mastered but the teacher can solve, updating the training data as the student’s capability grows. With only 1,000 examples, BoundaryEvo improves Qwen3.5‑4B accuracy from 62.9 % to 75.3 % on IMO‑AnswerBench and from 26.8 % to 46.0 % on AMO‑Bench, outperforming static and dynamic baselines across 11 benchmarks.
By Jiaming Su, Suorong Yang, Xudong Li, Tengchao Yang, Peng Ye