2025· Neural Information Processing Systems· 1 citation· 43 references
Computer Science
TL;DR
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 failure types.
Abstract
Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown remarkable progress across domains, yet their ability to perform inductive reasoning—inferring latent rules from sparse examples—remains limited. It is often assumed that chain-of-thought (CoT) prompting, as used in Large Reasoning Models (LRMs), enhances such reasoning. We investigate this assumption with creating four controlled, diagnostic game-based tasks—chess, Texas Hold’em, dice games, and blackjack—with hidden human-defined rules. We find that CoT reasoning can degrade inductive performance, with LRMs often underperforming their non-reasoning counterparts. To explain this, we present 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. Based on our theoretical and empirical analysis, we introduce structured interventions that adapt CoT generation according to our identified failure types. These interventions improve inductive accuracy without retraining. Our findings suggest that effective (CoT) reasoning depends not only on taking more steps but also on ensuring those steps are well-structured.
Large Language Models (LLMs) have achieved remarkable success in complex reasoning tasks through Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting. However, these models often exhibit"computational overthinking,"generating redundant reasoning steps that increase latency and cost without improving accuracy. Recent studies suggest that CoT trajectories can be significantly pruned, yet existing methods often rely on forcing a static thinking budget, heuristic filtering, sub-optimal early exit via classification, or expensive re-training. In this paper, we introduce OS-Pruner, a lightweight plug-in framework that formulates chain-of-thought pruning as an optimal stopping problem. Given a reasoning prefix, OS-Pruner learns whether further reasoning is worth its token cost by optimizing an explicit utility that trades off final-answer accuracy against generated length. Our novel formulation enables the model to dynamically assess the sufficient point of termination for a reasoning chain. OS-Pruner is designed to be lightweight during both training and inference, and to provide users with fine-grained control over the reasoning-effort vs. accuracy trade-off. On diverse reasoning benchmarks and base models, OS-Pruner achieves 20-60\% reduction in generation length with minimal accuracy sacrifice.
Mohammed Ehab, Aymane El Gadarri, Vivek F. Farias et al.· 0 citations
Chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning improves large language model (LLM) performance while also providing an observable interface to the model's reasoning process. Existing approaches that leverage verbalized CoTs to monitor reasoning correctness, however, largely evaluate the semantic correctness or consistency of individual intermediate steps, rather than how the reasoning process evolves across the trace. As a result, failures distributed across the reasoning trajectory, rather than those localized to a single incorrect step, remain comparatively underexplored. Furthermore, verbalized CoTs need not faithfully reflect the model's internal reasoning, motivating analyses that do not treat individual statements as literal accounts of internal computation. In this work, we therefore ask whether the dynamics of visible CoT can be leveraged to systematically distinguish successful from failed reasoning without assuming such semantic faithfulness. We study a range of LLMs on verifiable Boolean satisfiability tasks with variable complexity, enabling controlled comparisons near each model's capability frontier. Tagging CoT sentences by reasoning function reveals premature verification collapse on SAT problems: incorrect traces enter clause checking earlier, repeat similar operations, and finalize sooner. On UNSAT problems, models presumptuously move towards incorrect SAT conclusions, checking candidate assignments rather than deriving contradictions across constructed cases. Subsequently, a targeted proof-search prompt intervention raises Llama3-70B accuracy from 13.3% to 85%, correcting 84.6% of these errors. These results show that capability failures can manifest as distributed, task-dependent changes in the structure of visible reasoning, and that CoT dynamics agnostic to whether the verbalized trace reflects the model's internal computations can help diagnose and correct failures.
Shashwat Sourav, Aishwarya H. Balwani· 0 citations
Reason Popper-ly, a neurosymbolic framework that uses inductive logic programming (ILP) to learn relation composition rules from reasoning traces and deploys them as an online verifier for step-level correction, consistently improves terminal accuracy over standard CoT.
Large language models exhibit strong reasoning capabilities but often require significant computational resources due to verbose, un-structured Chain-of-Thought outputs. Recent approaches guide reasoning length through to-ken penalties or truncation, risking the omission of necessary steps. We posit that conciseness should be an emergent property of structured thought, rather than a result of artificially forced brevity. To this end, we first demonstrate that Attribute-Guided Prompting , a lightweight zero-shot strategy, improves reasoning performance while reducing inference cost. Building on this foundation, we introduce C ontro l led A ttribute-Driven R easoning O ptimization ( CLARO ), a reinforcement learning framework designed to internalize these benefits. CLARO guides models to embed high-quality structural attributes, such as read-ability, math density, syntactic compression, and low redundancy, within a user-defined to-ken budget. The proposed method outperforms state-of-the-art baselines across diverse benchmarks, yielding accuracy gains of up to 63.6%, demonstrating that guiding generated output language structure enhances reasoning. Overall, our findings establish that optimizing the thought process structure refines reasoning efficacy, with computational efficiency emerging as a derivative benefit of a clearer thought process. Code and models are available at https://github.com/odedsc/CLARO .
Oded Schlesinger, Young Kyung Kim, J. Matias Di Martino et al.· Annual Meeting of the Associ...· 0 citations
It is indicated that RL-trained models not only demonstrate greater awareness of their learned behaviors and stronger generalizability to novel, structurally similar tasks than SFT models but also often exhibit weak alignment between their reasoning traces and final outputs, an effect most pronounced in GRPO-trained models.
Pratham Singla, Shivank Garg, Ayush Singh et al.· Annual Meeting of the Associ...· 0 citations
Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning has significantly enhanced the multi-step problem-solving capabilities of large language models (LLMs) by introducing explicit intermediate reasoning. However, advanced Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) often exhibit overthinking behaviors, including excessively long reasoning steps, redundant steps, and high computational overhead. Existing token-length reward strategies aim to promote concise outputs, but often result in pseudo-conciseness, where token count is reduced, yet redundant reasoning persists, leading to longer and less structurally efficient chains. To address these limitations, we propose ChainPrune, a novel reasoning path semantic structural optimization method to efficiently and controllably synthesize self-generated high-quality training data. We initially consolidate self-generated reasoning paths into a tree-based structure, followed by a multi-criteria dominant path selection process for preference data construction that formulates shallow reasoning trajectories while preserving essential reasoning steps. To further enhance the quality of reasoning, we incorporate a DPO-based preference learning method combined with supervised loss, effectively mitigating false reward suppression. This innovative integration significantly enhances both the efficiency and effectiveness of our reasoning framework. Comprehensive experimental results demonstrate significant reductions in step length and computational overhead, while maintaining or even enhancing accuracy.
Weihang Pan, Zhengxu Yu, Yuxiang Zhang et al.· 1 citation