Lost at the Beginning of Reasoning

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2506.22058v1
• Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2025 09:53:57 GMT
• Title: Lost at the Beginning of Reasoning
• Authors: Baohao Liao, Xinyi Chen, Sara Rajaee, Yuhui Xu, Christian Herold, Anders Søgaard, Maarten de Rijke, Christof Monz,
• Abstract summary: We show that the first reasoning step exerts a disproportionately large influence on the final prediction.<n>We propose an efficient sampling strategy that leverages a reward model to identify and retain high-quality first reasoning steps.<n>We introduce a new benchmark specifically constructed with deliberately flawed first reasoning steps to systematically evaluate model self-correction capabilities.
• Score: 82.18834329384514
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Recent advancements in large language models (LLMs) have significantly advanced complex reasoning capabilities, particularly through extended chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning that incorporates mechanisms such as backtracking, self-reflection and self-correction. Despite these developments, the self-correction abilities of LLMs during long CoT reasoning remain underexplored. And recent findings on overthinking suggest that such models often engage in unnecessarily redundant reasoning. In this work, we empirically show that the first reasoning step exerts a disproportionately large influence on the final prediction - errors introduced at this stage can substantially degrade subsequent reasoning quality. This phenomenon is consistently observed across two state-of-the-art open-source reasoning model families: DeepSeek-R1 and Qwen3. To address this, we propose an efficient sampling strategy that leverages a reward model to identify and retain high-quality first reasoning steps while discarding suboptimal ones, achieving up to a 70% reduction in inference cost without sacrificing accuracy. Finally, we introduce a new benchmark specifically constructed with deliberately flawed first reasoning steps to systematically evaluate model self-correction capabilities, offering a foundation for future research on robust reasoning in LLMs.

Related papers

• Don't Overthink It: A Survey of Efficient R1-style Large Reasoning Models [49.598776427454176]
  Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) have gradually become a research hotspot due to their outstanding performance in handling complex tasks.<n>However, with the widespread application of these models, the problem of overthinking has gradually emerged.<n>Various efficient reasoning methods have been proposed, aiming to reduce the length of reasoning paths without compromising model performance and reasoning capability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-04T06:54:31Z)
• Accelerating LLM Reasoning via Early Rejection with Partial Reward Modeling [12.835376812101323]
  We introduce the hypothesis that PRMs are also Partial Reward Models.<n>This allows for principled early rejection based on intermediate token-level signals.<n>On math reasoning benchmarks, our method achieves up to 1.4$times$-9$times$ reduction in inference FLOPs without degrading final performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-04T00:58:56Z)
• Excessive Reasoning Attack on Reasoning LLMs [26.52688123765127]
  In this work, we expose a novel threat: adversarial inputs can be crafted to exploit excessive reasoning behaviors.<n>Our results demonstrate a 3x to 9x increase in reasoning length with comparable utility performance.<n>Our crafted adversarial inputs exhibit transferability, inducing computational overhead in o3-mini, o1-mini, DeepSeek-R1, and QWQ models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-17T10:16:52Z)
• ReaRAG: Knowledge-guided Reasoning Enhances Factuality of Large Reasoning Models with Iterative Retrieval Augmented Generation [38.64751082999587]
  Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) exhibit remarkable reasoning abilities but rely primarily on parametric knowledge, limiting factual accuracy.<n>We propose ReaRAG, a factuality-enhanced reasoning model that explores diverse queries without excessive iterations.<n>Our study enhances LRMs' factuality while effectively integrating robust reasoning for Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-27T17:44:18Z)
• Trade-offs in Large Reasoning Models: An Empirical Analysis of Deliberative and Adaptive Reasoning over Foundational Capabilities [101.77467538102924]
  Recent advancements in Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) have demonstrated remarkable performance in specialized reasoning tasks.<n>We show that acquiring deliberative reasoning capabilities significantly reduces the foundational capabilities of LRMs.<n>We demonstrate that adaptive reasoning -- employing modes like Zero-Thinking, Less-Thinking, and Summary-Thinking -- can effectively alleviate these drawbacks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-23T08:18:51Z)
• Stop Overthinking: A Survey on Efficient Reasoning for Large Language Models [54.04678363287392]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable capabilities in complex tasks.<n>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)
• Superficial Self-Improved Reasoners Benefit from Model Merging [38.72827436256771]
  Self-improvement as a solution to synthesizing high-quality data corpus.<n>In particular, our analysis reveals that even when LMs show improved in-domain (ID) reasoning accuracy, they actually compromise their generalized reasoning capabilities.<n>We propose Iterative Model Merging (IMM), a method that strategically combines weights from original and self-improved models to preserve generalization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-03T22:41:25Z)
• Bridging Internal Probability and Self-Consistency for Effective and Efficient LLM Reasoning [53.25336975467293]
  We present the first theoretical error decomposition analysis of methods such as perplexity and self-consistency.<n>Our analysis reveals a fundamental trade-off: perplexity methods suffer from substantial model error due to the absence of a proper consistency function.<n>We propose Reasoning-Pruning Perplexity Consistency (RPC), which integrates perplexity with self-consistency, and Reasoning Pruning, which eliminates low-probability reasoning paths.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-01T18:09:49Z)
• DetermLR: Augmenting LLM-based Logical Reasoning from Indeterminacy to Determinacy [76.58614128865652]
  We propose DetermLR, a novel perspective that rethinks the reasoning process as an evolution from indeterminacy to determinacy. First, we categorize known conditions into two types: determinate and indeterminate premises This provides an oveall direction for the reasoning process and guides LLMs in converting indeterminate data into progressively determinate insights. We automate the storage and extraction of available premises and reasoning paths with reasoning memory, preserving historical reasoning details for subsequent reasoning steps.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-28T10:05:51Z)

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.