arXiv:2509. 14704v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Benchmark saturation and training-data contamination increasingly obscure whether reported gains in large language models (LLMs) reflect genuine advances in reasoning or familiarity with recurring patterns in benchmark problems.
By Masaharu Mizumoto, Dat Nguyen, Zhiheng Han, Xingfu Li, Yo Nakawake, Le Minh Nguyen
arXiv:2608.23205v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) have revolutionized reasoning in LLMs, and the increasing public availability of reasoning traces creates valuable opport...
By Maria-Eleni Zoumpoulidi, Georgios Paraskevopoulos, Alexandros Potamianos
The paper investigates whether reasoning representations—explanations for large language model outputs—aid humans in evaluating those outputs. A controlled human study tested six reasoning formats across tasks of varying complexity, measuring structural understanding, error detection, and trust calibration. Results revealed a mismatch: participants favored planning- and decomposition-based representations, yet simpler chain-of-thought traces better supported verification, trust, and interpretability, while preferred formats increased calibration risks.
By Jaewoo Lim, Sungbok Shin, Sanghyun Hong
arXiv:2604. 01161v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) exhibiting test-time scaling behavior, such as extended reasoning traces and self-verification, have demonstrated remarkable performance on complex, long-term reasoning tasks.
By Gleb Rodionov, Roman Garipov, George Yakushev
arXiv:2512.00729v2 Announce Type: replace
Abstract: Motivated by the observed human-like behaviours in Large Reasoning Models (LRMs), this paper introduces a comprehensive taxonomy to characterise at...
By Yuxiang Chen, Zuohan Wu, Ziwei Wang, Xiangning Yu, Xujia Li, Linyi Yang, Mengyue Yang, Jun Wang, Lei Chen
The paper introduces a new task called reconciliatory explanation generation, where large language models (LLMs) must produce explanations that make contradictory statements compatible. It proposes reusing natural language inference datasets and new quality metrics for scalable evaluation. Experiments with 13 LLMs show limited success, especially when longer reasoning chains are involved, but reinforcement‑learning training improves performance on two narrative reasoning benchmarks.
By Jason Chan, Zhixue Zhao, Robert Gaizauskas