Trivial Vocabulary Bans Improve LLM Reasoning More Than Deep Linguistic Constraints

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.02699v1
• Date: Fri, 03 Apr 2026 03:48:27 GMT
• Title: Trivial Vocabulary Bans Improve LLM Reasoning More Than Deep Linguistic Constraints
• Abstract summary: A previous study reported that E-Prime selectively altered reasoning in language models.<n>I designed a replication with active controls to test the proposed mechanism.<n>I present these findings as a case study in discovery through disconfirmation.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
• Abstract: A previous study reported that E-Prime (English without the verb "to be") selectively altered reasoning in language models, with cross-model correlations suggesting a structural signature tied to which vocabulary was removed. I designed a replication with active controls to test the proposed mechanism: cognitive restructuring through specific vocabulary-cognition mappings. The experiment tested five conditions (unconstrained control, E-Prime, No-Have, elaborated metacognitive prompt, neutral filler-word ban) across six models and seven reasoning tasks (N=15,600 trials, 11,919 after compliance filtering). Every prediction from the cognitive restructuring hypothesis was disconfirmed. All four treatments outperformed the control (83.0%), including both active controls predicted to show null effects. The neutral filler-word ban, banning words like "very" and "just" with no role in logical inference, produced the largest improvement (+6.7 pp), while E-Prime produced the smallest (+3.7 pp). The four conditions ranked in perfect inverse order of theoretical depth. The cross-model correlation signature did not replicate (mean r=0.005). These results are consistent with a simpler mechanism: any constraint that forces a model off its default generation path acts as an output regularizer, improving reasoning by disrupting fluent but shallow response patterns. The shallowest constraints work best because they impose monitoring load with minimal conceptual disruption. I present these findings as a case study in discovery through disconfirmation.

Related papers

• Wrong Prediction, Right Answer: Recovering Evidence from Collapsed LLM Sequence Scores [31.709549159768727]
  We observe a consistent readout gap across diverse reasoning benchmarks.<n> hidden-state probes successfully decode correct answers even when native sequence scoring completely collapses.<n>Our results show that many apparent zero-shot reasoning deficits are expression failures masking intact internal logic.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-31T16:43:55Z)
• Understanding and Mitigating Premature Confidence for Better LLM Reasoning [76.16007941549857]
  Long chains of thought (CoT) from current language models frequently contain logical gaps and unjustified leaps.<n>We find such a signal in how the model's confidence evolves during reasoning.<n>We exploit this in progressive confidence shaping, a reinforcement learning objective that trains models to update their confidence as they reason rather than commit early.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-23T04:42:45Z)
• Do Language Models Know What Not to Say? Causal Evidence for Statistical Preemption in LLMs [13.891522069967507]
  Construction Grammar proposes statistical preemption: exposure to a conventional form preempts structurally possible but unattested alternatives.<n>We present a computational study that dissociates statistical preemption from the competing entrenchment hypothesis in large language models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-21T21:06:43Z)
• Language as a Latent Variable for Reasoning Optimization [45.35129925776798]
  As LLMs reduce English-centric bias, a surprising trend emerges: non-English responses sometimes outperform English on reasoning tasks.<n>We hypothesize that language functions as a latent variable that structurally modulates the model's internal inference pathways.<n>We propose polyGRPO, an RL framework that treats language variation as an implicit exploration signal.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-23T12:19:14Z)
• The Model Says Walk: How Surface Heuristics Override Implicit Constraints in LLM Reasoning [9.898274894485107]
  Large language models systematically fail when a salient surface cue conflicts with an unstated feasibility constraint.<n>We study this through a diagnose-measure-bridge-treat framework.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-30T21:36:09Z)
• Umwelt Engineering: Designing the Cognitive Worlds of Linguistic Agents [0.0]
  I propose design of the linguistic cognitive environment as a third layer in stack stack engineering.<n>Two experiments test the thesis that altering medium of reasoning alters itself.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-29T10:49:50Z)
• 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)
• How Does Prefix Matter in Reasoning Model Tuning? [57.69882799751655]
  We fine-tune three R1 series models across three core model capabilities: reasoning (mathematics), coding, safety, and factuality.<n>Results show that prefix-conditioned SFT improves both safety and reasoning performance, yielding up to +6% higher Safe@1 accuracy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-04T18:04:23Z)
• Stop Spinning Wheels: Mitigating LLM Overthinking via Mining Patterns for Early Reasoning Exit [114.83867400179354]
  Overthinking can degrade overall performance of large language models.<n>We categorize reasoning into three stages: insufficient exploration stage, compensatory reasoning stage, and reasoning convergence stage.<n>We develop a lightweight thresholding strategy based on rules to improve reasoning accuracy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-25T03:17:17Z)
• Chain-of-Defensive-Thought: Structured Reasoning Elicits Robustness in Large Language Models against Reference Corruption [51.98089842456886]
  We show how a wide range of large language models exhibit significantly improved robustness against reference corruption using a simple method called chain-of-defensive-thought.<n> Empirically, the improvements can be astounding, especially given the simplicity and applicability of the method.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-29T13:50:05Z)
• 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)
• Distilling Reasoning Ability from Large Language Models with Adaptive Thinking [54.047761094420174]
  Chain of thought finetuning (cot-finetuning) aims to endow small language models (SLM) with reasoning ability to improve their performance towards specific tasks.<n>Most existing cot-finetuning methods adopt a pre-thinking mechanism, allowing the SLM to generate a rationale before providing an answer.<n>This mechanism enables SLM to analyze and think about complex questions, but it also makes answer correctness highly sensitive to minor errors in rationale.<n>We propose a robust post-thinking mechanism to generate answers before rationale.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-14T07:19:27Z)
• On the Self-Verification Limitations of Large Language Models on Reasoning and Planning Tasks [17.329365493094542]
  We present a principled empirical study of the performance of GPT-4 in three domains: Game of 24, Graph Coloring, and STRIPS planning. We observe significant performance collapse with self-critique and significant performance gains with sound external verification.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-12T23:11:01Z)
• Large Language Models are Better Reasoners with Self-Verification [48.534270563880845]
  Large language models (LLMs) have shown strong reasoning ability in several natural language processing tasks. LLMs with chain of thought (CoT) prompting require multi-step prompting and multi-token prediction, which is highly sensitive to individual mistakes. We propose and prove that LLMs also have similar self-verification abilities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-19T15:51:52Z)

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.