Not All Errors Are Equal: Consequence-Aware Reasoning Compute Allocation

Abstract

Test-time compute has emerged as an effective paradigm for improving large language model capability at inference time. Existing allocation strategies primarily prioritize tasks according to difficulty, uncertainty, or expected performance gain, implicitly treating prediction errors as equally costly. This assumption is often misaligned with real deployment, where failures can differ substantially in their downstream tasks. To address this limitation, this paper introduces consequence-aware test-time compute allocation by formulating a cost-weighted scheduling problem where the priority of a task is its failure consequence with the marginal gain of additional compute. In practice, however, marginal gain is difficult to predict before execution, so we propose a deployable scheduler that uses consequence as the routing signal. The scheduler predicts task consequence from pre-solution inputs and allocates the available premium compute to the corresponding top-ranked tasks. Experiments on the SWE bench Lite show that consequence provides information beyond task difficulty and can be predicted before solving. Under a fixed compute budget, consequence-aware routing achieves the best high-consequence task success, while overall accuracy remains competitive. A controlled within-model experiment further confirms the same advantage when only inference attempts are reallocated.