Thoughts Are All Over the Place: On the Underthinking of o1-Like LLMs

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2501.18585v2
• Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2025 16:51:53 GMT
• Title: Thoughts Are All Over the Place: On the Underthinking of o1-Like LLMs
• Authors: Yue Wang, Qiuzhi Liu, Jiahao Xu, Tian Liang, Xingyu Chen, Zhiwei He, Linfeng Song, Dian Yu, Juntao Li, Zhuosheng Zhang, Rui Wang, Zhaopeng Tu, Haitao Mi, Dong Yu,
• Abstract summary: Large language models (LLMs) such as OpenAI's o1 have demonstrated remarkable abilities in complex reasoning tasks. We identify a phenomenon we term underthinking, where o1-like LLMs frequently switch between different reasoning thoughts. We propose a decoding strategy with thought switching penalty TIP that discourages premature transitions between thoughts.
• Score: 86.79757571440082
• License:
• Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) such as OpenAI's o1 have demonstrated remarkable abilities in complex reasoning tasks by scaling test-time compute and exhibiting human-like deep thinking. However, we identify a phenomenon we term underthinking, where o1-like LLMs frequently switch between different reasoning thoughts without sufficiently exploring promising paths to reach a correct solution. This behavior leads to inadequate depth of reasoning and decreased performance, particularly on challenging mathematical problems. To systematically analyze this issue, we conduct experiments on three challenging test sets and two representative open-source o1-like models, revealing that frequent thought switching correlates with incorrect responses. We introduce a novel metric to quantify underthinking by measuring token efficiency in incorrect answers. To address underthinking, we propose a decoding strategy with thought switching penalty TIP that discourages premature transitions between thoughts, encouraging deeper exploration of each reasoning path. Experimental results demonstrate that our approach improves accuracy across challenging datasets without requiring model fine-tuning. Our findings contribute to understanding reasoning inefficiencies in o1-like LLMs and offer a practical solution to enhance their problem-solving capabilities.

Related papers

• Hypothesis-Driven Theory-of-Mind Reasoning for Large Language Models [76.6028674686018]
  We introduce thought-tracing, an inference-time reasoning algorithm to trace the mental states of agents. Our algorithm is modeled after the Bayesian theory-of-mind framework. We evaluate thought-tracing on diverse theory-of-mind benchmarks, demonstrating significant performance improvements.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-17T15:08:50Z)
• The Danger of Overthinking: Examining the Reasoning-Action Dilemma in Agentic Tasks [96.27754404942364]
  Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) represent a breakthrough in AI problem-solving capabilities, but their effectiveness in interactive environments can be limited. This paper introduces and analyzes overthinking in LRMs. We observe three recurring patterns: Analysis Paralysis, Rogue Actions, and Premature Disengagement.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-12T09:23:26Z)
• Do NOT Think That Much for 2+3=? On the Overthinking of o1-Like LLMs [76.43407125275202]
  o1-like models can emulate human-like long-time thinking during inference. This paper presents the first comprehensive study on the prevalent issue of overthinking in these models. We propose strategies to mitigate overthinking, streamlining reasoning processes without compromising accuracy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-30T18:55:12Z)
• MR-Ben: A Meta-Reasoning Benchmark for Evaluating System-2 Thinking in LLMs [55.20845457594977]
  Large language models (LLMs) have shown increasing capability in problem-solving and decision-making. We present a process-based benchmark MR-Ben that demands a meta-reasoning skill. Our meta-reasoning paradigm is especially suited for system-2 slow thinking.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-20T03:50:23Z)
• Boosting of Thoughts: Trial-and-Error Problem Solving with Large Language Models [43.09706839884221]
  Boosting of Thoughts (BoT) is an automated prompting framework for problem solving with Large Language Models. We show that BoT consistently achieves higher or comparable problem-solving rates than other advanced prompting approaches.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-17T00:13:36Z)
• Synergy-of-Thoughts: Eliciting Efficient Reasoning in Hybrid Language Models [19.466985579720507]
  Large language models (LLMs) have shown impressive emergent abilities in a wide range of tasks, but the associated expensive API cost greatly limits the real application. We propose "Synergy of Thoughts"(SoT) to unleash the synergistic potential of hybrid LLMs with different scales for efficient reasoning. We show that SoT substantially reduces the API cost by 38.3%-75.1%, and simultaneously achieves state-of-the-art reasoning accuracy and solution diversity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-04T16:45:01Z)
• Everything of Thoughts: Defying the Law of Penrose Triangle for Thought Generation [42.472954457731355]
  We introduce a novel thought prompting approach called "Everything of Thoughts" (XoT) to defy the law of "Penrose triangle of existing thought paradigms. XoT leverages pretrained reinforcement learning and Monte Carlo Tree Search (MCTS) to incorporate external domain knowledge into thoughts. We evaluate XoT on several challenging multi-solution problem-solving tasks, including Game of 24, 8-Puzzle, and Pocket Cube.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-07T12:30:36Z)
• Encouraging Divergent Thinking in Large Language Models through Multi-Agent Debate [85.3444184685235]
  We propose a Multi-Agent Debate (MAD) framework, in which multiple agents express their arguments in the state of "tit for tat" and a judge manages the debate process to obtain a final solution. Our framework encourages divergent thinking in LLMs which would be helpful for tasks that require deep levels of contemplation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-30T15:25:45Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.