SPARK is introduced, which uses hidden-state response to diagnose whether a model internally enters an effective reasoning state and to guide lightweight test-time steering, and suggests that susceptibility can serve not only as a diagnostic signal for reasoning failures, but also as a practical guide for targeted test-time intervention.
Abstract
Reasoning failures in large language models (LLMs) are usually evaluated from final answers, but a wrong answer does not reveal why the model failed. The same incorrect output may reflect missing capability, an unstable reasoning trajectory, or a failure to activate a reasoning state that is already available in the frozen model. Existing prompting and benchmark-based evaluation methods mostly operate at the output level, while generic activation-steering methods typically apply global directions without diagnosing which examples require intervention. In this paper, we introduce SPARK, which uses hidden-state response to diagnose whether a model internally enters an effective reasoning state and to guide lightweight test-time steering. The key observation is that raw hidden-state susceptibility is strongly confounded by prompt length, especially in programmatic and algorithmic reasoning where harder serialized instances naturally become longer. SPARK therefore uses length-controlled susceptibility to separate input-scale effects from residual reasoning activation, and combines this signal with cross-layer coordination to select reasoning-active anchors and under-activated hard examples. We use FRONTIER-4.5K as a controlled programmatic reasoning suite for latent profiling and difficulty-aware analysis, and evaluate SPARK-Steering on GSM8K and MATH-500 with forward-only benchmark profiling. Our method improves Qwen3 series models consistently; on MATH-500, accuracy rises from 82.0% to 84.6% for Qwen3-4B and from 82.4% to 85.6% for Qwen3-8B. These results suggest that susceptibility can serve not only as a diagnostic signal for reasoning failures, but also as a practical guide for targeted test-time intervention.
This work treats each reasoning trace as a sequence of latent states rather than an unstructured texts, and investigates whether inference time interventions can provide fine-grained control over the self-looping reasoning process.
Experimental results show that CritICL consistently outperforms standard in-context learning and achieves performance competitive with or superior to test-time scaling methods, while requiring significantly fewer generations and lower token cost.
Yu-Fan Wu, Ying-Hui He, Zhengyi Hu et al.· 1 citation
This work presents a theoretical framework that reveals how reasoning steps can amplify error through three failure modes: incorrect sub-task decomposition, incorrect sub-task solving, and incorrect final answer summarization, and introduces structured interventions that adapt CoT generation according to the identified...
Haibo Jin, Peiyan Zhang, Man Luo et al.· Neural Information Processin...· 1 citation
A graded, multi-family, failure-aware framework for stress-testing reasoning models that exposes structure that an aggregate score hides and exposes consistent weaknesses across all models.
These results support an economical reusable causal interface within the tested operation banks, while keeping the claim explicitly conditional on the candidate architectures, interventions, and held-out futures.
Siyuan Ma, Yiqin Luo, Zhangji et al.· arXiv.org· 4 citations
This work introduces a diagnostic protocol using a minimal, target-label-free additive correction, showing that many apparent zero-shot reasoning deficits are expression failures masking intact internal logic, urging a narrower interpretation of benchmark evaluations.