Scaling Reasoning can Improve Factuality in Large Language Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2505.11140v1
• Date: Fri, 16 May 2025 11:39:33 GMT
• Title: Scaling Reasoning can Improve Factuality in Large Language Models
• Authors: Mike Zhang, Johannes Bjerva, Russa Biswas,
• Abstract summary: We thoroughly examine large language model (LLM) reasoning within complex open-domain question-answering (QA) scenarios.<n>To enrich reasoning traces, we introduce factual information from knowledge graphs in the form of paths into our reasoning traces.<n>Our findings indicate that, within a single run, smaller reasoning models achieve noticeable improvements in factual accuracy compared to their original instruction-tuned counterparts.
• Score: 7.184302333801519
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Recent studies on large language model (LLM) reasoning capabilities have demonstrated promising improvements in model performance by leveraging a lengthy thinking process and additional computational resources during inference, primarily in tasks involving mathematical reasoning (Muennighoff et al., 2025). However, it remains uncertain if longer reasoning chains inherently enhance factual accuracy, particularly beyond mathematical contexts. In this work, we thoroughly examine LLM reasoning within complex open-domain question-answering (QA) scenarios. We initially distill reasoning traces from advanced, large-scale reasoning models (QwQ-32B and DeepSeek-R1-671B), then fine-tune a variety of models ranging from smaller, instruction-tuned variants to larger architectures based on Qwen2.5. To enrich reasoning traces, we introduce factual information from knowledge graphs in the form of paths into our reasoning traces. Our experimental setup includes four baseline approaches and six different instruction-tuned models evaluated across a benchmark of six datasets, encompassing over 22.6K questions. Overall, we carry out 168 experimental runs and analyze approximately 1.7 million reasoning traces. Our findings indicate that, within a single run, smaller reasoning models achieve noticeable improvements in factual accuracy compared to their original instruction-tuned counterparts. Moreover, our analysis demonstrates that adding test-time compute and token budgets factual accuracy consistently improves by 2-8%, further confirming the effectiveness of test-time scaling for enhancing performance and consequently improving reasoning accuracy in open-domain QA tasks. We release all the experimental artifacts for further research.

Related papers

• Trustworthy Reasoning: Evaluating and Enhancing Factual Accuracy in LLM Intermediate Thought Processes [16.451488374845407]
  We present a novel framework addressing a critical vulnerability in Large Language Models (LLMs)<n>This phenomenon poses substantial risks in high-stakes domains including healthcare, legal analysis, and scientific research.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-25T10:34:51Z)
• Reasoning or Memorization? Unreliable Results of Reinforcement Learning Due to Data Contamination [67.67725938962798]
  Pre-training on massive web-scale corpora leaves Qwen2.5 susceptible to data contamination in widely used benchmarks.<n>We introduce a generator that creates fully clean arithmetic problems of arbitrary length and difficulty, dubbed RandomCalculation.<n>We show that only accurate reward signals yield steady improvements that surpass the base model's performance boundary.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-14T17:55:15Z)
• Think or Not? Exploring Thinking Efficiency in Large Reasoning Models via an Information-Theoretic Lens [51.90059610606049]
  This paper revisits the efficiency of such reasoning processes through an information-theoretic lens.<n>We propose two metrics, InfoBias and InfoGain, to quantify divergence from ideal reasoning paths and stepwise information contribution.<n>Motivated by these findings, we introduce an entropy-based Adaptive Think strategy that dynamically halts reasoning once confidence is sufficiently high.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-23T13:38:56Z)
• Phi-4-reasoning Technical Report [42.508165017775]
  We introduce Phi-4-reasoning, a 14-billion parameter reasoning model that achieves strong performance on complex reasoning tasks.<n>We develop Phi-4-reasoning-plus, a variant enhanced through a short phase of outcome-based reinforcement learning.<n>Both models outperform significantly larger open-weight models such as DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Llama-70B model and approach the performance levels of full DeepSeek-R1 model.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-30T05:05:09Z)
• Quantization Hurts Reasoning? An Empirical Study on Quantized Reasoning Models [48.98109982725689]
  We conduct the first systematic study on quantized reasoning models, evaluating the open-sourced DeepSeek-R1-Distilled Qwen and LLaMA families.<n>Our investigation covers weight, KV cache, and activation quantization using state-of-the-art algorithms at varying bit-widths.<n>We identify model size, model origin, and task difficulty as critical determinants of performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-07T08:22:45Z)
• 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)
• Towards Thinking-Optimal Scaling of Test-Time Compute for LLM Reasoning [113.49074603075032]
  Recent studies have shown that making a model spend more time thinking through longer Chain of Thoughts (CoTs) enables it to gain significant improvements in complex reasoning tasks.<n>We explore whether scaling with longer CoTs can indeed impair the reasoning performance of Large Language Models (LLMs) in certain domains.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-25T10:48:05Z)
• LIMO: Less is More for Reasoning [23.312893016642096]
  We demonstrate that sophisticated mathematical reasoning can emerge with only a few examples.<n>Our model, LIMO, achieves 63.3% accuracy on AIME24 and 95.6% on MATH500.<n>LIMO exhibits strong out-of-distribution generalization, achieving a 45.8% absolute improvement across diverse benchmarks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-05T17:23:45Z)
• The Surprising Effectiveness of Test-Time Training for Few-Shot Learning [59.309477460893916]
  Language models (LMs) have shown impressive performance on tasks within their training distribution, but often struggle with structurally novel tasks.<n>We investigate the effectiveness of test-time training (TTT) as a mechanism for improving LMs' reasoning and few-shot learning capabilities.<n>Our findings highlight the limitations of in-context learning for novel tasks and demonstrate the potential of test-time training to enhance language model adaptability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-11T18:59:45Z)
• Masked Thought: Simply Masking Partial Reasoning Steps Can Improve Mathematical Reasoning Learning of Language Models [102.72940700598055]
  In reasoning tasks, even a minor error can cascade into inaccurate results. We develop a method that avoids introducing external resources, relying instead on perturbations to the input. Our training approach randomly masks certain tokens within the chain of thought, a technique we found to be particularly effective for reasoning tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-04T16:21:54Z)
• Logic-Guided Data Augmentation and Regularization for Consistent Question Answering [55.05667583529711]
  This paper addresses the problem of improving the accuracy and consistency of responses to comparison questions. Our method leverages logical and linguistic knowledge to augment labeled training data and then uses a consistency-based regularizer to train the model.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-04-21T17:03:08Z)

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.