When2Think introduces a post‑training framework that dynamically allocates reasoning depth in Large Reasoning Models based on instance difficulty. The method uses Instance‑level Difficulty‑Aware Control (IDAC) to shape rewards with pre‑computed accuracy and token usage statistics, enabling stable, critic‑free optimization without learned reward models. Experiments on mathematical benchmarks show that When2Think improves accuracy‑efficiency trade‑offs, achieving higher Pass@3 scores while reducing token usage compared to baseline models.
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.
The paper introduces Budget‑Efficient Thinking (BET), a two‑stage framework that treats adaptive reasoning as a computational investment, aligning solve‑or‑fold decisions with expected return rather than perceived difficulty. BET learns three distinct behaviors: concise short solves for easy queries, early abstention (nice fold) when further reasoning is unlikely to pay off, and allocating sufficient compute (hero call) for hard‑but‑solvable questions. Experiments on seven benchmarks with three base models show BET cuts reasoning tokens by 54% while boosting accuracy by up to 3.2%, and it transfers effectively to scientific QA and logical reasoning tasks.
The paper introduces CARE, a contrastive accuracy reward estimation method that adaptively adjusts reasoning length for large language models. By comparing beneficial length adjustments from online sampled responses, CARE applies adaptive length rewards within Group Relative Policy Optimization without extra hyperparameters or inference cost. Experiments on multiple reasoning benchmarks show that CARE improves Pass@1 by up to 4% while reducing reasoning length by 37%, achieving higher token efficiency.
arXiv:2609.37304v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large reasoning models improve performance on challenging problems by allocating additional computation before answering, but longer reasoning does not...
arXiv:2606. 07108v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Recent advances in Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) demonstrate remarkable performance improvements by iteratively reflecting, exploring, and executing complex tasks, yet suffer from inefficiencies due to redundant reasoning, known as "overthinking".
arXiv:2606. 07950v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: RL with verifiable rewards can substantially improve LLM reasoning, yet standard GRPO-style training often treats easy, hard, and learnable questions alike through uniform sampling and weighting, leading to inefficient compute allocation.
arXiv:2607. 16205v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards has emerged as a standard approach for enhancing reasoning in large language models, which typically optimizes the policy by contrasting multiple self generated rollouts.
arXiv:2604. 05164v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: As LLM reasoning performance plateaus, improving inference-time compute efficiency is crucial to mitigate overthinking and long thinking traces even for simple queries.
arXiv:2606. 17687v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Despite remarkable performance on complex tasks, Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) often generate excessively long Chain-of-Thoughts (CoT), inflating computational costs even for simple queries.
The paper surveys efficient reasoning in large language models, contrasting fast intuitive (System 1) and slow deep (System 2) reasoning. It analyzes why System 2 is computationally costly yet more accurate, and why System 1 is efficient but less effective. The survey covers causes of inefficiency, patterns of reasoning behavior, and potential solutions to balance performance and computational budgets, offering actionable insights and an open‑source repository for ongoing research.
arXiv:2511. 02130v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: We propose Re-FORC, an adaptive reward prediction method that, given a query, enables prediction of the expected future rewards as a function of the number of future thinking tokens.
arXiv:2602. 09924v4 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Running LLMs with extended reasoning on every problem is expensive, but determining which inputs actually require additional compute remains challenging.