Effectively Controlling Reasoning Models through Thinking Intervention

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2503.24370v1
• Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2025 17:50:13 GMT
• Title: Effectively Controlling Reasoning Models through Thinking Intervention
• Authors: Tong Wu, Chong Xiang, Jiachen T. Wang, Prateek Mittal,
• Abstract summary: Reasoning-enhanced large language models explicitly generate intermediate reasoning steps prior to generating final answers.<n>This emerging generation framework offers a unique opportunity for more fine-grained control over model behavior.<n>We propose Thinking Intervention, a novel paradigm designed to explicitly guide the internal reasoning processes of LLMs.
• Score: 38.77100471547442
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Reasoning-enhanced large language models (LLMs) explicitly generate intermediate reasoning steps prior to generating final answers, helping the model excel in complex problem-solving. In this paper, we demonstrate that this emerging generation framework offers a unique opportunity for more fine-grained control over model behavior. We propose Thinking Intervention, a novel paradigm designed to explicitly guide the internal reasoning processes of LLMs by strategically inserting or revising specific thinking tokens. We conduct comprehensive evaluations across multiple tasks, including instruction following on IFEval, instruction hierarchy on SEP, and safety alignment on XSTest and SORRY-Bench. Our results demonstrate that Thinking Intervention significantly outperforms baseline prompting approaches, achieving up to 6.7% accuracy gains in instruction-following scenarios, 15.4% improvements in reasoning about instruction hierarchies, and a 40.0% increase in refusal rates for unsafe prompts using open-source DeepSeek R1 models. Overall, our work opens a promising new research avenue for controlling reasoning LLMs.

Related papers

• OpenDeception: Benchmarking and Investigating AI Deceptive Behaviors via Open-ended Interaction Simulation [23.204532296472834]
  We introduce OpenDeception, a novel deception evaluation framework with an open-ended scenario dataset. OpenDeception jointly evaluates both the deception intention and capabilities of LLM-based agents by inspecting their internal reasoning process. To avoid ethical concerns and costs of high-risk deceptive interactions with human testers, we propose to simulate the multi-turn dialogue via agent simulation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-18T14:11:27Z)
• Truthful or Fabricated? Using Causal Attribution to Mitigate Reward Hacking in Explanations [30.68740512996253]
  Chain-of-thought explanations are widely used to inspect the decision process of large language models. We show that preference optimization can inadvertently reduce the faithfulness of these explanations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-07T17:49:23Z)
• R-PRM: Reasoning-Driven Process Reward Modeling [53.06844294668382]
  Process Reward Models (PRMs) have emerged as a promising solution by evaluating each reasoning step.<n>Existing PRMs typically output evaluation scores directly, limiting both learning efficiency and evaluation accuracy.<n>We propose Reasoning-Driven Process Reward Modeling (R-PRM)<n>R-PRM generates seed data from limited annotations, effectively bootstrapping our model's reasoning capabilities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-27T09:23:08Z)
• R1-VL: Learning to Reason with Multimodal Large Language Models via Step-wise Group Relative Policy Optimization [86.32257216965229]
  We propose a new online reinforcement learning framework that enables MLLMs to self-improve reasoning ability via simple, effective and dense step-wise rewarding.<n>StepGRPO introduces two novel rule-based reasoning rewards: Step-wise Reasoning Accuracy Reward (StepRAR) and Step-wise Reasoning Validity Reward (StepRVR)<n>With the proposed StepGRPO, we introduce R1-VL, a series of MLLMs with outstanding capabilities in step-by-step reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-17T08:51:44Z)
• Large Reasoning Models in Agent Scenarios: Exploring the Necessity of Reasoning Capabilities [74.35956310688164]
  We propose the LaRMA framework, encompassing nine tasks across Tool Usage, Plan Design, and Problem Solving.<n>Our findings address four research questions: LRMs surpass LLMs in reasoning-intensive tasks like Plan Design, leveraging iterative reflection for superior outcomes.<n>LRMs' enhanced reasoning incurs higher computational costs, prolonged processing, and behavioral challenges, including overthinking and fact-ignoring tendencies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-14T04:34:31Z)
• Attentive Reasoning Queries: A Systematic Method for Optimizing Instruction-Following in Large Language Models [0.0]
  We present Attentive Reasoning Queries (ARQs), a novel structured reasoning approach.<n>ARQs significantly improves instruction-following in Large Language Models through domain-specialized reasoning blueprints.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-05T17:03:48Z)
• RAG-Star: Enhancing Deliberative Reasoning with Retrieval Augmented Verification and Refinement [85.08223786819532]
  Existing large language models (LLMs) show exceptional problem-solving capabilities but might struggle with complex reasoning tasks.<n>We propose textbfRAG-Star, a novel RAG approach that integrates retrieved information to guide the tree-based deliberative reasoning process.<n>Our experiments involving Llama-3.1-8B-Instruct and GPT-4o demonstrate that RAG-Star significantly outperforms previous RAG and reasoning methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-17T13:05:36Z)
• A NotSo Simple Way to Beat Simple Bench [0.0]
  This paper presents a novel framework for enhancing reasoning capabilities in large language models (LLMs)<n>We propose a multi-step prompting strategy coupled with global consistency checks to improve model accuracy and robustness.<n>Our results reveal model-specific strengths: Claude excels in maintaining logical consistency, while GPT-4o exhibits exploratory creativity but struggles with ambiguous prompts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-12T16:04:31Z)
• Deliberate Reasoning in Language Models as Structure-Aware Planning with an Accurate World Model [14.480267340831542]
  Structure-aware Planning with an Accurate World Model (SWAP)<n>SWAP integrates structured knowledge representation with learned planning.<n>We evaluate SWAP across diverse reasoning-intensive benchmarks including math reasoning, logical reasoning, and coding tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-04T04:23:36Z)
• OVM, Outcome-supervised Value Models for Planning in Mathematical Reasoning [15.59540726867483]
  We argue that in guided decoding, assessing the potential of an incomplete reasoning path can be more advantageous than simply ensuring per-step correctness. Inspired by the findings that $textitoutcome supervision for guided decoding essentially acts as a value model, we propose Outcome-supervised Value Model (OVM) Our experiments on two multi-step mathematical reasoning datasets, GSM8K and Game of 24, demonstrate the superior performance of the OVM model.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-16T09:56:28Z)
• Let's reward step by step: Step-Level reward model as the Navigators for Reasoning [64.27898739929734]
  Process-Supervised Reward Model (PRM) furnishes LLMs with step-by-step feedback during the training phase. We propose a greedy search algorithm that employs the step-level feedback from PRM to optimize the reasoning pathways explored by LLMs. To explore the versatility of our approach, we develop a novel method to automatically generate step-level reward dataset for coding tasks and observed similar improved performance in the code generation tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-16T05:21:50Z)

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.