Can Confidence Estimates Decide When Chain-of-Thought Is Necessary for LLMs?

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2510.21007v2
• Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2025 09:25:38 GMT
• Title: Can Confidence Estimates Decide When Chain-of-Thought Is Necessary for LLMs?
• Authors: Samuel Lewis-Lim, Xingwei Tan, Zhixue Zhao, Nikolaos Aletras,
• Abstract summary: Chain-of-thought (CoT) prompting has emerged as a common technique for enhancing the reasoning abilities of large language models.<n>We present the first systematic study of training-free confidence estimation methods for CoT gating.
• Score: 32.02698064940949
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Chain-of-thought (CoT) prompting has emerged as a common technique for enhancing the reasoning abilities of large language models (LLMs). While extended reasoning can boost accuracy on complex tasks, it is often unnecessary and substantially increases token usage, limiting the practicality of reasoning models in many scenarios. Recent models, such as GPT-OSS and Qwen3, expose controls that enable users to adjust the length of CoT or determine whether it is used at all. Yet, it remains unclear when CoT should be used: on some tasks it improves performance, while on others it provides little benefit or even harms performance. We address this challenge with confidence-gated CoT, where a model invokes reasoning only when confidence in its direct answer is low. To this end, we present the first systematic study of training-free confidence estimation methods for CoT gating. Specifically, we evaluate four training-free confidence estimation methods and compare them to a random baseline and an oracle that always knows when CoT is needed. Through extensive experiments, we show that existing training-free confidence measures can reduce redundant CoT and outperform randomly invoked CoT. However, the utility of individual confidence measures is inconsistent, varying with both the dataset and the model, underscoring the difficulty of deploying confidence-gated CoT in practice. By analysing both strengths and failure modes, our study highlights the potential and limitations of current methods and paves the way toward more reliable adaptive gating of CoT.

Related papers

• Constraint-Rectified Training for Efficient Chain-of-Thought [60.52883907721588]
  Chain-of-Thought (CoT) has significantly enhanced the reasoning capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs)<n>While longer reasoning traces can improve answer quality and unlock abilities such as self-correction, they also incur high inference costs and often introduce redundant steps, known as overthinking.<n>Recent research seeks to develop efficient reasoning strategies that balance reasoning length and accuracy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-13T02:13:45Z)
• Fact-Checking with Large Language Models via Probabilistic Certainty and Consistency [7.806516365113592]
  Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used in applications requiring factual accuracy.<n>While fact-checking can mitigate these errors, existing methods typically retrieve external evidence indiscriminately.<n>We introduce Probabilistic Certainty and Consistency (PCC), a framework that estimates factual confidence.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-05T21:57:41Z)
• CoT-Saliency: Unified Chain-of-Thought Reasoning for Heterogeneous Saliency Tasks [96.64597365827046]
  We present the first unified framework that jointly handles three operationally heterogeneous saliency tasks.<n>We introduce a Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning process in a Vision-Language Model (VLM) to bridge task heterogeneity.<n>We show our model matches or outperforms specialized SOTA methods and strong closed-source VLMs across all tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-01T04:37:01Z)
• BrowseConf: Confidence-Guided Test-Time Scaling for Web Agents [58.05949210993854]
  We investigate whether search agents have the ability to communicate their own confidence through verbalized confidence scores after long sequences of actions.<n>We propose Test-Time Scaling (TTS) methods that use confidence scores to determine answer quality, encourage the model to try again until reaching a satisfactory confidence level.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-27T15:58:51Z)
• Confidence as a Reward: Transforming LLMs into Reward Models [54.98336080630691]
  Confidence-as-a-Reward (CRew) is a training-free method that utilizes token-level confidence in the model's final answers as a proxy for reward.<n>We show that CRew outperforms existing training-free reward approaches on the MATH500 and RewardMATH benchmarks.<n>We propose CRew-DPO, a training strategy that constructs preference data from confidence scores combined with correctness signals.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-15T12:51:47Z)
• Deep Hidden Cognition Facilitates Reliable Chain-of-Thought Reasoning [33.30315111732609]
  Chain of Thought (CoT) reasoning has demonstrated remarkable deep reasoning capabilities.<n>However, its reliability is often undermined by the accumulation of errors in intermediate steps.<n>This paper introduces an approach to calibrate the CoT reasoning accuracy by leveraging the model's intrinsic veracity encoding.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-14T07:41:35Z)
• ConCISE: Confidence-guided Compression in Step-by-step Efficient Reasoning [64.93140713419561]
  Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) perform strongly in complex reasoning tasks via Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting, but often suffer from verbose outputs.<n>Existing fine-tuning-based compression methods either operate post-hoc pruning, risking disruption to reasoning coherence, or rely on sampling-based selection.<n>We introduce ConCISE, a framework designed to generate concise reasoning chains, integrating Confidence Injection to boost reasoning confidence, and Early Stopping to terminate reasoning when confidence is sufficient.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-08T01:40:40Z)
• Conformal Calibration of Statistical Confidence Sets [1.8840155706520811]
  We introduce two novel methods, TRUST and TRUST++, for calibrating confidence sets to achieve distribution-free conditional coverage.<n>We demonstrate that our methods outperform existing approaches, particularly in small-sample regimes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-28T20:45:59Z)
• Selective Learning: Towards Robust Calibration with Dynamic Regularization [79.92633587914659]
  Miscalibration in deep learning refers to there is a discrepancy between the predicted confidence and performance. We introduce Dynamic Regularization (DReg) which aims to learn what should be learned during training thereby circumventing the confidence adjusting trade-off.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-13T11:25:20Z)
• When Does Confidence-Based Cascade Deferral Suffice? [69.28314307469381]
  Cascades are a classical strategy to enable inference cost to vary adaptively across samples. A deferral rule determines whether to invoke the next classifier in the sequence, or to terminate prediction. Despite being oblivious to the structure of the cascade, confidence-based deferral often works remarkably well in practice.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-06T04:13:57Z)

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.