Challenge: Xu et al., 2024) study shows that slow thinking can distinguish correct and irrelevant reasoning paths.
Approach: They investigate how fast vs. slow thinking affects layer-wise gradients in large language models . they find that slow thinking can distinguish correct and irrelevant reasoning paths .
Outcome: The results show that slow thinking can distinguish correct and irrelevant reasoning paths.

Similar Papers

Imbalanced Gradients in RL Post-Training of Multi-Task LLMs (2026.findings-eacl)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Large-gradient tasks can achieve similar or even much lower learning gains than small-grading ones.
Approach: They show that large-gradient tasks can achieve lower learning gains than small-grading ones . large-grade tasks can accomplish similar or even lower learning gain than small grade ones if they are large .
Outcome: The proposed approach fails when certain tasks produce larger gradients . Large-gradient tasks can achieve lower learning gains than small-gradent ones .
How Instruction and Reasoning Data shape Post-Training: Data Quality through the Lens of Layer-wise Gradients (2026.acl-long)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Spectral properties of low/high-quality instruction and reasoning data are used to explain finetuning dynamics in large language models.
Approach: They propose to analyze layer-wise gradients induced by low/high-quality instruction and reasoning data for LLM post-training.
Outcome: The results show that higher-quality data are associated with lower nuclear norms and higher effective ranks.
Is Chain-of-Thought Reasoning of LLMs a Mirage? A Data Distribution Lens (2026.findings-acl)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting has been shown to be effective in eliciting structured reasoning from large language models (LLMs).
Approach: They propose a data distribution lens to understand when and why CoT reasoning fails . they propose 'data-based' training that trains LLMs from scratch .
Outcome: The proposed model enables models to generate reasoning trajectories that approximate those observed during training.
How Likely Do LLMs with CoT Mimic Human Reasoning? (2025.coling-main)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Using chain-of-thought to elicit reasoning capabilities is not always effective and accurate.
Approach: They compare the reasoning process of LLMs with humans to understand the causal chain . they find that LLM deviates from the ideal causal chain, resulting in spurious correlations .
Outcome: The proposed method does not improve performance or accurately represent reasoning processes in LLMs.
Mapping the Minds of LLMs: A Graph-Based Analysis of Reasoning LLMs (2025.emnlp-main)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) often display unstable behaviors, e.g., hallucinating unsupported premises, overthinking simple tasks, and displaying higher sensitivity to prompt variations.
Approach: They propose a graph-based analytical framework that clusters long, verbose CoT outputs into semantically coherent reasoning steps, then constructs directed reasoning graphs to capture contextual and logical dependencies among these steps.
Outcome: The proposed framework enables quantitative evaluation of internal reasoning structure and quality beyond conventional metrics and provides practical insights for prompt engineering and cognitive analysis of LLMs.
Do LLMs Really Need 10+ Thoughts for “Find the Time 1000 Days Later”? Towards Structural Understanding of LLM Overthinking (2026.acl-long)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Existing studies on LLMs' thought processes are limited to superficial, profiling-based observations, failing to delve into their inner workings.
Approach: They propose a utility-based definition of overthinking that moves beyond length-based metrics and provides a more insightful understanding of LLMs' thought progression.
Outcome: The proposed model decomposes the LLM thought process into minimally complete sub-thoughts and identifies common thinking patterns for topically similar queries.
Can LLMs Learn From Mistakes? An Empirical Study on Reasoning Tasks (2024.findings-emnlp)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Existing work has shown that simple learning can enhance the chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning of large language models.
Approach: They construct mistake-correction datasets to identify and correct mistakes in CoTs . they conclude that LLMs can learn from mistakes to enhance their CoT reasoning .
Outcome: The proposed datasets show that LLMs can learn from mistakes to enhance their CoT reasoning performance.
Through the Valley: Path to Effective Long CoT Training for Small Language Models (2025.emnlp-main)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Long chain-of-thought (CoT) supervision is effective for large language models . but small models trained on limited long CoT data experience performance degradation .
Approach: They identify a phenomenon called Long CoT Degradation in small language models . long CoT data can be used to generate long chain-of-thought (CoT) responses .
Outcome: The results show that models trained on 8k long CoT examples lose up to 75% of their original performance before fine-tuning.
Think Faster Than Words: Efficient LLM Chain-of-Thought Reasoning via Dynamic Shortcut Decoding (2026.acl-long)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Existing methods that prune or employ early stopping to reduce latency often compromise reasoning reliability.
Approach: They propose a shortcut decoding framework that integrates probes over internal hidden states with step-level entropy to detect convergence of reasoning during generation and adaptively selects between a fast-exit path and a stability-verified path to remove redundant steps while preserving answer correctness.
Outcome: The proposed framework reduces token usage by approximately 35% and maintains accuracy comparable to full CoT decoding.
ReEfBench: Quantifying the Reasoning Efficiency of LLMs (2026.acl-long)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Existing methods for Chain-of-Thought evaluations do not distinguish between genuine reasoning and mere verbosity.
Approach: They propose a framework for the non-intrusive, comprehensive process-centric evaluation of reasoning grounded in First-Order Logic.
Outcome: The proposed framework identifies four distinct behavioral prototypes and diagnoses the failure modes.

What is GenGO?

GenGO is an NLP powered publication search system. It currenctly indexes 30k+ papers from ACL Anthology, and implements multi-aspect summarization, semantic search, and more!

Information

About
Limitations