Large Reasoning Models are not thinking straight: on the unreliability of thinking trajectories

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2507.00711v1
• Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2025 12:14:22 GMT
• Title: Large Reasoning Models are not thinking straight: on the unreliability of thinking trajectories
• Authors: Jhouben Cuesta-Ramirez, Samuel Beaussant, Mehdi Mounsif,
• Abstract summary: Large Language Models (LLMs) trained via Reinforcement Learning (RL) have recently achieved impressive results on reasoning benchmarks.<n>Yet, growing evidence shows that these models often generate longer but ineffective chains of thought (CoTs)<n>We present new evidence of overthinking, where models disregard correct solutions even when explicitly provided, instead continuing to generate unnecessary reasoning steps.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) trained via Reinforcement Learning (RL) have recently achieved impressive results on reasoning benchmarks. Yet, growing evidence shows that these models often generate longer but ineffective chains of thought (CoTs), calling into question whether benchmark gains reflect real reasoning improvements. We present new evidence of overthinking, where models disregard correct solutions even when explicitly provided, instead continuing to generate unnecessary reasoning steps that often lead to incorrect conclusions. Experiments on three state-of-the-art models using the AIME2024 math benchmark reveal critical limitations in these models ability to integrate corrective information, posing new challenges for achieving robust and interpretable reasoning.

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)
• Libra: Assessing and Improving Reward Model by Learning to Think [37.22776255575947]
  We present a reasoning-oriented benchmark (Libra Bench) to address the limitations of existing reward model benchmarks in reasoning scenarios.<n>We introduce a novel approach for improving the generative reward model via learning-to-think methodologies.<n>We develop Libra-RM series, a collection of generative reward models with reasoning capabilities that achieve state-of-the-art results on various benchmarks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-29T10:02:43Z)
• Lost at the Beginning of Reasoning [82.18834329384514]
  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.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-27T09:53:57Z)
• Reasoning about Uncertainty: Do Reasoning Models Know When They Don't Know? [7.423494663010787]
  Reasoning language models have set state-of-the-art (SOTA) records on many challenging benchmarks.<n>Like previous language models, reasoning models are prone to generating confident, plausible responses that are incorrect.<n>Knowing when and how much to trust these models is critical to the safe deployment of reasoning models in real-world applications.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-22T21:46:42Z)
• Exploring and Exploiting the Inherent Efficiency within Large Reasoning Models for Self-Guided Efficiency Enhancement [101.77467538102924]
  Large reasoning models (LRMs) exhibit overthinking, which hinders efficiency and inflates inference cost.<n>We propose two lightweight methods to enhance LRM efficiency.<n>First, we introduce Efficiency Steering, a training-free activation steering technique that modulates reasoning behavior via a single direction.<n>Second, we develop Self-Rewarded Efficiency RL, a reinforcement learning framework that dynamically balances task accuracy and brevity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-18T17:18:12Z)
• ProRL: Prolonged Reinforcement Learning Expands Reasoning Boundaries in Large Language Models [89.37819814048288]
  We introduce ProRL, a novel training methodology that incorporates KL divergence control, reference policy, and a diverse suite of tasks.<n>Our empirical analysis reveals that RL-trained models consistently outperform base resetting models across a wide range of pass@k evaluations.<n>These findings offer new insights into the conditions under which RL meaningfully expands reasoning boundaries in language models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-30T17:59:01Z)
• CoThink: Token-Efficient Reasoning via Instruct Models Guiding Reasoning Models [56.40065909544213]
  Large language models (LLMs) benefit from increased test-time compute, a phenomenon known as test-time scaling.<n>However, reasoning-optimized models often overthink even simple problems, producing excessively verbose outputs and leading to low token efficiency.<n>We identify two key causes of this verbosity: (1) reinforcement learning reduces the information density of forward reasoning, and (2) backward chain-of thought training encourages redundant and often unnecessary verification steps.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-28T06:24:45Z)
• Long-Short Chain-of-Thought Mixture Supervised Fine-Tuning Eliciting Efficient Reasoning in Large Language Models [23.34070841541423]
  We propose Long-Short Chain-of-Thought Mixture Supervised Fine-Tuning (LS-Mixture SFT)<n>Our experiments demonstrate that models trained using LS-Mixture SFT, compared to those trained with direct SFT, achieved an average accuracy improvement of 2.3%.<n>This work offers an approach to endow non-reasoning models with reasoning capabilities through supervised fine-tuning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-06T12:18:11Z)
• Think Deep, Think Fast: Investigating Efficiency of Verifier-free Inference-time-scaling Methods [39.89239733570008]
  This work conducts a comprehensive analysis of inference-time scaling methods for both reasoning and non-reasoning models.<n>We find that non-reasoning models, even with an extremely high inference budget, still fall substantially behind reasoning models.<n>For reasoning models, majority voting proves to be a robust inference strategy, generally competitive or outperforming other more sophisticated ITC methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-18T19:32:55Z)
• 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)
• Question Decomposition Improves the Faithfulness of Model-Generated Reasoning [23.34325378824462]
  Large language models (LLMs) are difficult to verify the correctness and safety of their behavior. One approach is to prompt LLMs to externalize their reasoning, by having them generate step-by-step reasoning as they answer a question. This approach relies on the stated reasoning faithfully reflecting the model's actual reasoning, which is not always the case. Decomposition-based methods achieve strong performance on question-answering tasks, sometimes approaching that of CoT.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-17T00:54:10Z)

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.