arXiv AI By Jinu Lee, Shivam Agarwal, Amruta Parulekar, Siddarth Madala, Dilek Hakkani-Tur, Julia Hockenmaier

ReasoningFlow: Discourse Structures for Understanding LLM Reasoning Traces

Read the original on arXiv AI →

arXiv:2606. 05402v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large reasoning models (LRMs) produce reasoning traces with non-linear structures, such as backtracking and self-correction, that complicate the evaluation and monitoring of the reasoning process.

Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv AI.

arXiv Computation and Language
Aug 28

TRACES: Tagging Reasoning Steps for Adaptive Cost-Efficient Early-Stopping

TRACES (Tagging Reasoning Steps for Adaptive Cost‑Efficient Early‑Stopping) is a lightweight framework that tags reasoning steps of large‑language models in real time, enabling adaptive, cost‑efficient early stopping during inference. By monitoring the types of steps generated, the method identifies when models shift their reasoning after arriving at a correct answer, allowing for interpretable stopping criteria. Experiments on mathematical reasoning benchmarks (MATH500, GSM8K, AIME) and knowledge benchmarks (MMLU, GPQA) show token reductions of 20–50% while preserving accuracy, with more conservative thresholds needed for harder tasks such as BeyondAIME and IMO AnswerBench.

By Yannis Belkhiter, Seshu Tirupathi, Giulio Zizzo, John D. Kelleher
arXiv Machine Learning
Aug 11

Are Latent Reasoning Models Easily Interpretable?

arXiv:2604. 04902v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Latent reasoning models (LRMs) have attracted significant research interest due to their low inference cost (relative to explicit reasoning models) and theoretical ability to explore multiple reasoning paths in parallel.

By Connor Dilgren, Sarah Wiegreffe
arXiv AI
Sep 15

Towards a Mechanistic Understanding of Propositional Logical Reasoning in Large Language Models

The paper investigates how large language models perform propositional logical reasoning by conducting a causal mechanistic analysis on the PropLogic-MI benchmark. It identifies four interlocking mechanisms—Staged Computation, Information Transmission, Fact Retrospection, and Specialized Attention Heads—that organize the reasoning process across layers. The study demonstrates that these mechanisms recur across different model families, rule categories, and reasoning hops, indicating a structured, layer‑organized internal process for propositional reasoning.

By Danchun Chen, Qiyao Yan, Chenpeng Wang, Liangming Pan