Reasoning Shift: How Context Silently Shortens LLM Reasoning
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.01161v1
- Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2026 17:14:18 GMT
- Title: Reasoning Shift: How Context Silently Shortens LLM Reasoning
- Abstract summary: Large language models (LLMs) exhibiting test-time scaling behavior, such as extended reasoning traces and self-verification, have demonstrated remarkable performance on complex, long-term reasoning tasks.<n>We investigate this robustness of reasoning models across three scenarios: problems augmented with lengthy, irrelevant context; multi-turn conversational settings with independent tasks; and problems presented as a subtask within a complex task.<n>We observe that reasoning models tend to produce much shorter reasoning traces (up to 50%) for the same problem under different context conditions compared to the traces produced when the problem is presented in isolation.
- Score: 2.143376938174599
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
- Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) exhibiting test-time scaling behavior, such as extended reasoning traces and self-verification, have demonstrated remarkable performance on complex, long-term reasoning tasks. However, the robustness of these reasoning behaviors remains underexplored. To investigate this, we conduct a systematic evaluation of multiple reasoning models across three scenarios: (1) problems augmented with lengthy, irrelevant context; (2) multi-turn conversational settings with independent tasks; and (3) problems presented as a subtask within a complex task. We observe an interesting phenomenon: reasoning models tend to produce much shorter reasoning traces (up to 50%) for the same problem under different context conditions compared to the traces produced when the problem is presented in isolation. A finer-grained analysis reveals that this compression is associated with a decrease in self-verification and uncertainty management behaviors, such as double-checking. While this behavioral shift does not compromise performance on straightforward problems, it might affect performance on more challenging tasks. We hope our findings draw additional attention to both the robustness of reasoning models and the problem of context management for LLMs and LLM-based agents.
Related papers
- METER: Evaluating Multi-Level Contextual Causal Reasoning in Large Language Models [61.33372454250959]
Contextual causal reasoning is a critical yet challenging capability for Large Language Models.<n>Existing benchmarks fail to ensure context consistency or cover the full causal hierarchy.<n>We pioneer METER to systematically benchmark LLMs across all three levels of the causal ladder.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-04-13T14:07:11Z) - Farther the Shift, Sparser the Representation: Analyzing OOD Mechanisms in LLMs [100.02824137397464]
We investigate how Large Language Models adapt their internal representations when encountering inputs of increasing difficulty.<n>We reveal a consistent and quantifiable phenomenon: as task difficulty increases, the last hidden states of LLMs become substantially sparser.<n>This sparsity--difficulty relation is observable across diverse models and domains.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-03-03T18:48:15Z) - To Think or Not To Think, That is The Question for Large Reasoning Models in Theory of Mind Tasks [56.11584171938381]
Theory of Mind (ToM) assesses whether models can infer hidden mental states such as beliefs, desires, and intentions.<n>Recent progress in Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) has boosted step-by-step inference in mathematics and coding.<n>We present a systematic study of nine advanced Large Language Models (LLMs) comparing reasoning models with non-reasoning models.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-02-11T08:16:13Z) - Dynamics Within Latent Chain-of-Thought: An Empirical Study of Causal Structure [58.89643769707751]
We study latent chain-of-thought as a manipulable causal process in representation space.<n>We find that latent-step budgets behave less like homogeneous extra depth and more like staged functionality with non-local routing.<n>These results motivate mode-conditional and stability-aware analyses as more reliable tools for interpreting and improving latent reasoning systems.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-02-09T15:25:12Z) - Analyzing Reasoning Consistency in Large Multimodal Models under Cross-Modal Conflicts [74.47786985522762]
We identify a critical failure mode termed textual inertia, where models tend to blindly adhere to the erroneous text while neglecting conflicting visual evidence.<n>We propose the LogicGraph Perturbation Protocol that structurally injects perturbations into the reasoning chains of diverse LMMs.<n>Results reveal that models successfully self-correct in less than 10% of cases and predominantly succumb to blind textual error propagation.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-01-07T16:39:34Z) - Consistency Is Not Always Correct: Towards Understanding the Role of Exploration in Post-Training Reasoning [75.79451512757844]
Foundation models exhibit broad knowledge but limited task-specific reasoning.<n> RLVR and inference scaling motivate post-training strategies such as RLVR and inference scaling.<n>We show that RLVR induces a squeezing effect, reducing reasoning entropy and forgetting some correct paths.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-11-10T18:25:26Z) - Selection, Reflection and Self-Refinement: Revisit Reasoning Tasks via a Causal Lens [19.316594303998667]
Reasoning tasks have long been regarded as rigorous benchmarks for assessing the capabilities of machine learning models.<n>We revisit reasoning tasks from a causal perspective, seeking to understand their behavior in latent space.<n>We introduce a framework, called SR$2$, that incorporates the estimated latent variables as feedback into the selection mechanism.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-10-09T13:45:31Z) - Inverse Scaling in Test-Time Compute [51.16323216811257]
Extending the reasoning length of Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) deteriorates performance.<n>We identify five distinct failure modes when models reason for longer.<n>These findings suggest that while test-time compute scaling remains promising for improving model capabilities, it may inadvertently reinforce problematic reasoning patterns.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-07-19T00:06:13Z) - The Illusion of Thinking: Understanding the Strengths and Limitations of Reasoning Models via the Lens of Problem Complexity [16.266145641151375]
Large Reasoning Models generate detailed thinking processes before providing answers.<n>We show that LRMs face a complete accuracy collapse beyond certain complexities.<n>We also investigate the reasoning traces in more depth, studying the patterns of explored solutions.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-06-07T22:42:29Z) - What's Missing in Vision-Language Models? Probing Their Struggles with Causal Order Reasoning [26.671128120554457]
causal reasoning is fundamental to solving complex high-level reasoning tasks.<n>Existing benchmarks often include a mixture of reasoning questions.<n>We introduce VQA-Causal and VCR-Causal to isolate and rigorously evaluate causal reasoning abilities.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-06-01T07:17:46Z) - Exploring LLM Reasoning Through Controlled Prompt Variations [0.9217021281095907]
We evaluate how well state-of-the-art models maintain logical consistency and correctness when confronted with four categories of prompt perturbations.<n>Our experiments, conducted on thirteen open-source and closed-source LLMs, reveal that introducing irrelevant context within the model's context window significantly degrades performance.<n>Certain perturbations inadvertently trigger chain-of-thought-like reasoning behaviors, even without explicit prompting.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-04-02T20:18:50Z) - Reasoning Effort and Problem Complexity: A Scaling Analysis in LLMs [26.494798719138526]
We investigate how the reasoning effort of large language models scales with problem complexity.<n>Our results show that reasoning effort scales with problem size, but only up to a critical problem complexity.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-03-19T11:13:51Z) - Failure Modes of LLMs for Causal Reasoning on Narratives [51.19592551510628]
We investigate the interaction between world knowledge and logical reasoning.<n>We find that state-of-the-art large language models (LLMs) often rely on superficial generalizations.<n>We show that simple reformulations of the task can elicit more robust reasoning behavior.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-10-31T12:48:58Z)
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.