arXiv Computation and Language

STOP: Structured On-Policy Pruning of Long-Form Reasoning in Low-Data Regimes

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 17

OBC-Prune: Outcome-Based Calibration for Large Reasoning Model Pruning

OBC‑Prune introduces an outcome‑based calibration approach for pruning large reasoning models, focusing on the causal importance of each reasoning sentence rather than uniform activation salience. By pairing correct and incorrect rollouts and using intervention‑based analysis, it assigns per‑token weights that guide one‑shot pruning methods such as SparseGPT, Wanda, and ALPS. Experiments on DeepSeek‑R1‑Distill‑Qwen models show consistent accuracy gains and shorter reasoning traces across multiple benchmarks at 40‑50% sparsity.

By Ha Lan Nguyen, Huy Hoang Tran, Trac-Duy Tran, Dung D. Le
arXiv AI
Sep 4

</think> Doesn't Stop Reasoning: Analysis of Spurious CoT Termination

The paper investigates a training‑free early‑exit technique that inserts an end‑of‑think (EoT) token to terminate chain‑of‑thought (CoT) reasoning in large reasoning models. It finds that the injected EoT often fails to cleanly switch the model from reasoning to answering, leading to continued reasoning‑like generation—termed spurious CoT termination—whose length scales with the amount of reasoning saved. By increasing attention to the EoT token through Exit‑token Attention Biasing (EAB), the authors reduce spurious termination and shorten the answering phase across multiple models and benchmarks.

By Seunghee Koh, Sungjae Choi, Minchan Kwon, Sunghyun Baek, Junmo Kim
arXiv AI
Jun 30

Reconsidering Overthinking: Penalizing Internal and External Redundancy in CoT Reasoning

arXiv:2508. 02178v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Large reasoning models (LRMs) often exhibit overthinking, producing verbose Chain-of-Thought (CoT) traces that increase inference cost and obscure the underlying reasoning process.

By Taihang Zhen, Jialiang Hong, Kai Chen, Guang Yang, Junlan Feng, Wenpeng Zhu, Jing Huo, Yang Gao, Depeng Wang, Haitao Wan, Xi Yang, Fanyu Meng, Yuyao Zhang, Ji Qi, Xiangyu Zhou
arXiv AI
3d ago

Learning to Stop without Learning to Stop: Self-Supervised Confidence Training Improves Reasoning Efficiency

The paper demonstrates that fine‑tuning reasoning models to predict their own confidence at intermediate steps—using only 600 self‑supervised examples—substantially improves inference efficiency. Without adding any explicit stopping or length penalties, the models generate up to 25 % fewer tokens while maintaining accuracy on mathematical, scientific, and coding benchmarks across several architectures. The study finds that confidence supervision preserves the models’ high‑level reasoning structure rather than merely suppressing specific behaviors.

By Parsa Hosseini, Akasha Tigalappanavara, Sumit Nawathe, Chenrui Fan, Sourya Basu, Genta Indra Winata, Anirban Das, Soheil Feizi, Nima Chitsazan
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