Confidence-Aware Alignment Makes Reasoning LLMs More Reliable
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.07353v1
- Date: Fri, 08 May 2026 07:08:25 GMT
- Title: Confidence-Aware Alignment Makes Reasoning LLMs More Reliable
- Abstract summary: We introduce CASPO, a framework that aligns token-level confidence with step-wise logical correctness without training a separate reward model.<n>During inference, we propose Confidence-aware Thought (CaT), which dynamically prunes uncertain reasoning branches with negligible O(V) latency.<n>Experiments across ten benchmarks and multiple model families show that CASPO consistently improves reasoning reliability and inference efficiency.
- Score: 65.44962502963378
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
- Abstract: Large reasoning models often reach correct answers through flawed intermediate steps, creating a gap between final accuracy and reasoning reliability. Existing alignment strategies address this with external verifiers or massive sampling, limiting scalability. In this work, we introduce CASPO (Confidence-Aware Step-wise Preference Optimization), a framework that aligns token-level confidence with step-wise logical correctness through iterative Direct Preference Optimization, without training a separate reward model. During inference, we propose Confidence-aware Thought (CaT), which leverages this calibrated confidence to dynamically prune uncertain reasoning branches with negligible O(V) latency. Experiments across ten benchmarks and multiple model families show that CASPO consistently improves reasoning reliability and inference efficiency. CASPO scales to Qwen3-8B-Base and surpasses tree-search baselines on AIME'24 and AIME'25 without using reward-model data. We also release a step-wise dataset with confidence annotations to support fine-grained analysis of reasoning reliability. Code is available at https://github.com/Thecommonirin/CASPO.
Related papers
- Does Reasoning Preserve Alignment? On the Trustworthiness of Large Reasoning Models [55.788110316999166]
We compare reasoning models produced via supervised fine-tuning, RL-based post-training, and distillation against instruction-tuned baselines.<n>We observe that reasoning models often improve on reasoning benchmarks but exhibit alignment regressions.<n>These regressions are consistent with behavioral drift from the instruction-tuned baseline, measured by KL divergence.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-06-09T16:14:27Z) - Process Supervision of Confidence Margin for Calibrated LLM Reasoning [52.373121066425455]
Scaling test-time computation with reinforcement learning (RL) has emerged as a reliable path to improve large language models (LLM) reasoning ability.<n>Yet, outcome-based reward often incentivizes models to be overconfident, leading to hallucinations, unreliable confidence-based control, and unnecessary compute allocation.<n>We introduce Reinforcement Learning with Confidence Margin (textbfRLCM), a calibration-aware RL framework that jointly optimize correctness and confidence reliability.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-04-25T14:40:13Z) - Instinct vs. Reflection: Unifying Token and Verbalized Confidence in Multimodal Large Models [11.878003218072765]
Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) have demonstrated exceptional capabilities in various perception and reasoning tasks.<n>We propose a monotone confidence fusion framework to merge dual-channel signals and cross-channel consistency to estimate correctness.<n>Experiments on diverse open-source and closed-source MLLMs show that our method consistently yields more reliable confidence estimates.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-04-19T06:07:39Z) - FACT-E: Causality-Inspired Evaluation for Trustworthy Chain-of-Thought Reasoning [49.65751420291115]
Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting has improved LLM reasoning, but models often generate explanations that appear coherent while containing unfaithful intermediate steps.<n>We propose FACT-E, a causality-inspired framework for evaluating CoT quality.<n>We show that FACT-E improves reasoning-trajectory selection and yields stronger in-context learnings.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-04-12T15:35:08Z) - BAS: A Decision-Theoretic Approach to Evaluating Large Language Model Confidence [22.382291859991472]
We introduce the Behavioral Alignment Score (BAS), a decision-theoretic metric for evaluating how well large language models support abstention-aware decision making.<n>BAS is derived from an explicit answer-or-abstain utility model and aggregates realized utility across a continuum of risk thresholds.<n>We show theoretically that truthful confidence estimates uniquely maximize expected BAS utility, linking calibration to decision-optimal behavior.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-04-03T17:44:32Z) - Confidence Before Answering: A Paradigm Shift for Efficient LLM Uncertainty Estimation [47.91529693614168]
Existing methods are predominantly answer-first, producing confidence only after generating an answer.<n>We study a confidence-first paradigm, where the model outputs its confidence before answering, interpreting this score as the model's probability of answering the question correctly.<n>We propose CoCA, a reinforcement learning framework that jointly optimize confidence calibration and answer accuracy via segmented credit assignment.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-03-06T04:03:13Z) - Thinking by Subtraction: Confidence-Driven Contrastive Decoding for LLM Reasoning [58.331709210563616]
Thinking by Subtraction is a confidence-driven contrastive decoding approach.<n>A small subset of low-confidence tokens disproportionately contributes to reasoning errors and unnecessary output expansion.<n>Our method, Confidence-Driven Contrastive Decoding, detects low-confidence tokens during decoding and intervenes at these positions.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-02-20T14:13:22Z) - Certainty-Guided Reasoning in Large Language Models: A Dynamic Thinking Budget Approach [0.15749416770494704]
We show that Certainty-Guided Reasoning (CGR) improves baseline accuracy while reducing token usage.<n>CGR can eliminate millions of tokens in aggregate, with tunable trade-offs between certainty thresholds and efficiency.<n>By integrating confidence into the reasoning process, CGR makes large reasoning language models more adaptive, trustworthy, and resource efficient.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-09-09T14:57:15Z) - Deliberative Searcher: Improving LLM Reliability via Reinforcement Learning with constraints [18.10515528600634]
We propose textbfDeliberative Searcher, the first framework to integrate certainty calibration with retrieval-based search for open-domain question answering.<n>The agent performs multi-step reflection and verification over Wikipedia data and is trained with a reinforcement learning algorithm that optimize for accuracy under a soft reliability constraint.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-07-22T16:09:34Z) - 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)
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.