Reasoning on a Spectrum: Aligning LLMs to System 1 and System 2 Thinking

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2502.12470v1
• Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2025 02:58:37 GMT
• Title: Reasoning on a Spectrum: Aligning LLMs to System 1 and System 2 Thinking
• Authors: Alireza S. Ziabari, Nona Ghazizadeh, Zhivar Sourati, Farzan Karimi-Malekabadi, Payam Piray, Morteza Dehghani,
• Abstract summary: Large Language Models (LLMs) exhibit impressive reasoning abilities, yet their reliance on structured step-by-step reasoning reveals a critical limitation.<n>This work challenges the assumption that step-by-step reasoning is always optimal and highlights the need for adapting reasoning strategies based on task demands.
• Score: 0.9709444454602557
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) exhibit impressive reasoning abilities, yet their reliance on structured step-by-step processing reveals a critical limitation. While human cognition fluidly adapts between intuitive, heuristic (System 1) and analytical, deliberative (System 2) reasoning depending on the context, LLMs lack this dynamic flexibility. This rigidity can lead to brittle and unreliable performance when faced with tasks that deviate from their trained patterns. To address this, we create a dataset of 2,000 samples with valid System 1 and System 2 answers, explicitly align LLMs with these reasoning styles, and evaluate their performance across reasoning benchmarks. Our results reveal an accuracy-efficiency trade-off: System 2-aligned models excel in arithmetic and symbolic reasoning, while System 1-aligned models perform better in commonsense tasks. A mechanistic analysis of model responses shows that System 1 models employ more definitive answers, whereas System 2 models demonstrate greater uncertainty. Interpolating between these extremes produces a monotonic transition in reasoning accuracy, preserving coherence. This work challenges the assumption that step-by-step reasoning is always optimal and highlights the need for adapting reasoning strategies based on task demands.

Related papers

• S1-Bench: A Simple Benchmark for Evaluating System 1 Thinking Capability of Large Reasoning Models [13.083179473480705]
  Large Reasoning Models' (LRMs) reliance on deep analytical thinking may limit their system 1 thinking capabilities. We introduce S1-Bench, a novel benchmark designed to evaluate LRMs' performance on simple tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-14T16:13:23Z)
• Unlocking Efficient Long-to-Short LLM Reasoning with Model Merging [17.038807261969033]
  Long-to-Short (L2S) reasoning aims to balance reasoning depth with practical efficiency. Model merging offers a cost-effective and robust alternative by integrating the quick-thinking capabilities of System 1 models with the methodical reasoning of System 2 models. Our experiments reveal that model merging can reduce average response length by up to 55% while preserving or even improving baseline performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-26T15:34:37Z)
• Stop Overthinking: A Survey on Efficient Reasoning for Large Language Models [54.04678363287392]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable capabilities in complex tasks. Recent advancements in OpenAI o1 and DeepSeek-R1 have further improved performance in System-2 reasoning domains.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-20T17:59:38Z)
• FINEREASON: Evaluating and Improving LLMs' Deliberate Reasoning through Reflective Puzzle Solving [90.88021670297664]
  FINEREASON is a logic-puzzle benchmark for evaluation of large language models' reasoning capabilities. We introduce two tasks: state checking, and state transition, for a comprehensive evaluation of how models assess the current situation and plan the next move. We show that models trained on our state checking and transition data demonstrate gains in math reasoning by up to 5.1% on GSM8K.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-27T16:23:25Z)
• From System 1 to System 2: A Survey of Reasoning Large Language Models [72.99519859756602]
  Foundational Large Language Models excel at fast decision-making but lack depth for complex reasoning. OpenAI's o1/o3 and DeepSeek's R1 have demonstrated expert-level performance in fields such as mathematics and coding.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-24T18:50:52Z)
• Teaching LLMs According to Their Aptitude: Adaptive Reasoning for Mathematical Problem Solving [55.895917967408586]
  Existing approaches to mathematical reasoning with large language models rely on Chain-of-Thought (CoT) for generalizability or Tool-Integrated Reasoning (TIR) for precise computation.<n>We propose TATA (Teaching LLMs According to Their Aptitude), an adaptive framework that enables LLMs to personalize their reasoning strategy spontaneously.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-17T16:56:23Z)
• LLM2: Let Large Language Models Harness System 2 Reasoning [65.89293674479907]
  Large language models (LLMs) have exhibited impressive capabilities across a myriad of tasks, yet they occasionally yield undesirable outputs.<n>We introduce LLM2, a novel framework that combines an LLM with a process-based verifier.<n>LLMs2 is responsible for generating plausible candidates, while the verifier provides timely process-based feedback to distinguish desirable and undesirable outputs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-29T06:32:36Z)
• Deconfounded Causality-aware Parameter-Efficient Fine-Tuning for Problem-Solving Improvement of LLMs [12.48241058167222]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable efficiency in tackling various tasks based on human instructions. But studies reveal that they often struggle with tasks requiring reasoning, such as math or physics limitation. This raises questions about whether LLMs truly comprehend embedded knowledge or merely learn to replicate the token distribution without a true understanding of the content. We propose Decon Causal Adaptation (DCA), a novel parameter-efficient fine-tuning (PEFT) method to enhance the model's reasoning capabilities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-04T13:17:09Z)
• 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.<n>We present a process-based benchmark MR-Ben that demands a meta-reasoning skill.<n>Our meta-reasoning paradigm is especially suited for system-2 slow thinking.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-20T03:50:23Z)
• LLM Reasoners: New Evaluation, Library, and Analysis of Step-by-Step Reasoning with Large Language Models [25.537725151112387]
  We introduce AutoRace for fully automated reasoning chain evaluation. We also develop LLM Reasoners, a library for standardized modular implementation of existing and new reasoning algorithms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-08T06:35:09Z)
• Measuring and Improving Chain-of-Thought Reasoning in Vision-Language Models [61.28463542324576]
  Vision-language models (VLMs) have recently demonstrated strong efficacy as visual assistants that can generate human-like outputs. We evaluate existing state-of-the-art VLMs and find that even the best-performing model is unable to demonstrate strong visual reasoning capabilities and consistency. We propose a two-stage training framework aimed at improving both the reasoning performance and consistency of VLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-08T17:49:44Z)

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.