Understanding and Steering the Cognitive Behaviors of Reasoning Models at Test-Time
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2512.24574v1
- Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2025 02:46:04 GMT
- Title: Understanding and Steering the Cognitive Behaviors of Reasoning Models at Test-Time
- Abstract summary: We study the structure of reasoning trajectories and uncover specialized attention heads that correlate with distinct cognitive behaviors.<n>We propose CREST, a training-free method for Cognitive REasoning Steering at Test-time.<n>CREST adaptively suppresses unproductive reasoning behaviors, yielding both higher accuracy and lower computational cost.
- Score: 22.9491443902816
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
- Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) often rely on long chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning to solve complex tasks. While effective, these trajectories are frequently inefficient, leading to high latency from excessive token generation, or unstable reasoning that alternates between underthinking (shallow, inconsistent steps) and overthinking (repetitive, verbose reasoning). In this work, we study the structure of reasoning trajectories and uncover specialized attention heads that correlate with distinct cognitive behaviors such as verification and backtracking. By lightly intervening on these heads at inference time, we can steer the model away from inefficient modes. Building on this insight, we propose CREST, a training-free method for Cognitive REasoning Steering at Test-time. CREST has two components: (1) an offline calibration step that identifies cognitive heads and derives head-specific steering vectors, and (2) an inference-time procedure that rotates hidden representations to suppress components along those vectors. CREST adaptively suppresses unproductive reasoning behaviors, yielding both higher accuracy and lower computational cost. Across diverse reasoning benchmarks and models, CREST improves accuracy by up to 17.5% while reducing token usage by 37.6%, offering a simple and effective pathway to faster, more reliable LLM reasoning.
Related papers
- Efficient Test-Time Scaling via Temporal Reasoning Aggregation [5.87118425760756]
We propose TRACE, a training-free framework for efficient test-time scaling.<n>TRACE determines when to terminate reasoning based on temporal aggregation of multi-step evidence.<n>We show that TRACE reduces reasoning token usage by 25-30% on average while maintaining accuracy within 1-2% of full-length reasoning.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-04-19T07:39:40Z) - Early Stopping for Large Reasoning Models via Confidence Dynamics [55.67938134245981]
Large reasoning models rely on long chain-of-thought generation to solve complex problems.<n>Key challenge is determining when the model should stop reasoning and produce the final answer.<n>We propose CoDE-Stop, an early stopping method that leverages the dynamics of intermediate answer confidence to decide when to terminate reasoning.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-04-06T17:59:45Z) - 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) - ATTNPO: Attention-Guided Process Supervision for Efficient Reasoning [31.958298572740848]
We propose ATTNPO, a low-overhead process-supervised RL framework.<n>We first identify a set of special attention heads that naturally focus on essential steps while suppressing redundant ones.<n>We then employ two sub-strategies to mitigate overthinking by discouraging redundant steps while preserving accuracy by reducing penalties on essential steps.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-02-10T16:40:22Z) - Mitigating Cognitive Inertia in Large Reasoning Models via Latent Spike Steering [12.332146893333949]
Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) have achieved remarkable performance by scaling test-time compute.<n>LRMs frequently suffer from Cognitive Inertia, a failure pattern manifesting as either overthinking (inertia of motion) or rigidity (inertia of direction)
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-01-30T02:47:12Z) - Structured Reasoning for Large Language Models [59.215789462977206]
We propose Structured Reasoning (SCR), a framework that decouples reasoning trajectories into explicit, evaluable, and trainable components.<n>SCR substantially improves reasoning efficiency and self-verification.<n>Compared with existing reasoning paradigms, it reduces output token length by up to 50%.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-01-12T04:04:01Z) - Addressing Overthinking in Large Vision-Language Models via Gated Perception-Reasoning Optimization [56.59356959631999]
Gated Perception-Reasoning Optimization (GPRO) is a meta-reasoning controller that dynamically routes computation among three decision paths.<n>GPRO substantially improves both accuracy and efficiency, outperforming recent slow-thinking methods.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-01-07T23:05:17Z) - Metacognitive Reuse: Turning Recurring LLM Reasoning Into Concise Behaviors [45.578570554635775]
Large language models (LLMs) now solve multi-step problems by emitting extended chains of thought.<n>We study a simple mechanism that converts recurring reasoning fragments into concise, reusable "behaviors"<n>These behaviors are stored in a "behavior handbook" which supplies them to the model in-context at inference or distills them into parameters via supervised fine-tuning.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-09-16T16:44:26Z) - Is Long-to-Short a Free Lunch? Investigating Inconsistency and Reasoning Efficiency in LRMs [8.359909829007005]
We investigate whether efficient reasoning strategies introduce behavioral inconsistencies in large reasoning models (LRMs)<n>$ICBENCH$ is a benchmark designed to measure inconsistency in LRMs across three dimensions.<n>We find that while larger models generally exhibit greater consistency than smaller ones, they all display widespread "scheming" behaviors.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-06-24T10:25:28Z) - Fractional Reasoning via Latent Steering Vectors Improves Inference Time Compute [60.151643048803145]
We propose Fractional Reasoning, a framework that enables continuous control over reasoning intensity at inference time.<n>Our method operates by extracting the latent steering vector associated with deeper reasoning and reapplying it with a tunable scaling factor.<n> Experiments on GSM8K, MATH500, and GPQA demonstrate that Fractional Reasoning consistently improves performance across diverse reasoning tasks and models.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-06-18T21:15:59Z) - Let LRMs Break Free from Overthinking via Self-Braking Tuning [68.93713497579853]
Large reasoning models (LRMs) have significantly enhanced their reasoning capabilities by generating longer chains of thought.<n>This performance gain comes at the cost of a substantial increase in redundant reasoning during the generation process.<n>We propose a novel framework, Self-Braking Tuning (SBT), which tackles overthinking from the perspective of allowing the model to regulate its own reasoning process.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-05-20T16:53:40Z) - SEAL: Steerable Reasoning Calibration of Large Language Models for Free [58.931194824519935]
Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated compelling capabilities for complex reasoning tasks via the extended chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning mechanism.<n>Recent studies reveal substantial redundancy in the CoT reasoning traces, which negatively impacts model performance.<n>We introduce SEAL, a training-free approach that seamlessly calibrates the CoT process, improving accuracy while demonstrating significant efficiency gains.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-04-07T02:42:07Z)
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.