Free Energy Heuristics: Fast-And-Frugal Cognition as Active Inference Under Uncertain Precision
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2606.15877v1
- Date: Sun, 14 Jun 2026 16:04:09 GMT
- Title: Free Energy Heuristics: Fast-And-Frugal Cognition as Active Inference Under Uncertain Precision
- Abstract summary: Chain-of-thought (CoT) improves large language models' performance in math and symbolic reasoning.<n>But on planning, contested ethics, and tasks where the model cannot check itself, more reasoning makes things worse.<n>We argue it is meta-uncertainty: how unsure the model is about the reliability of its own evidence.
- Score: 0.0
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
- Abstract: Chain-of-thought (CoT) improves large language models' performance in math and symbolic reasoning. But on planning, contested ethics, and tasks where the model cannot check itself, more reasoning makes things worse. Both effects are documented; what has been missing is a principled account of which property decides the outcome. We argue it is meta-uncertainty: how unsure the model is about the reliability of its own evidence. When that uncertainty is high, extra reasoning stops adding signal and starts manufacturing false confidence. We prove that the policy minimizing expected free energy under uncertain precision stops integrating cues after a finite number of high-validity ones when the precision prior is heavy-tailed (Theorem 2.6.1), and under a Descending Dominance condition, is sample-wise identical to take-the-best (Theorem 2.7.4). Fast-and-frugal heuristics and active inference are, then, two descriptions of the same computation. The prediction is that on high-meta-uncertainty items, longer CoT should degrade accuracy. We score the regime per item (simulate-and-recover rho > 0.96), build FEH-79, a benchmark of Knightian frames with matched controls, and run a pre-registered study across seven models (five open-weight 3B-32B, two frontier), five CoT lengths, and 7,875 responses. The gate, fixed before any data, required a negative interaction with posterior probability above 0.95 and an accuracy drop of more than 6 points. It held. The high-regime drop is 17.3 points (95% CI [7.7, 25.5]); matched items with definite answers show no cost. The effect is regime-dependent: decisive in capable mid-to-large models, directional in the two frontier systems, absent-to-reversed in the weakest. The framework answers when CoT helps and unifies the Bayesian and fast-and-frugal traditions: less-is-more effects are evidence about the meta-uncertainty regime, not against Bayesian cognition.
Related papers
- Accurate Ensembles, Fragile Narratives: Multi-Scale Stacking and a Fidelity Audit of LLM-Generated Explanations for Credit Risk [0.0]
Credit scoring increasingly relies on models whose decision logic cannot be read off their parameters.<n>A common proposal closes that gap with a language model: compute feature attributions, hand them to an LLM, and let it write the rationale.<n>We build such a system end to end and test whether the second half of the promise holds.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-08-08T13:22:14Z) - Can We Trust LLM's Logic? Quantifying Uncertainty, Coherence, and Robustness via a Graph-Based Framework [0.6743011393792991]
GRAPHEVAL is a graph-based reasoning framework that re-frames uncertainty quantification (UQ) as a holistic reasoning fidelity problem.<n>We propose a novel UQ metric, Graph Reasoning Coherence Score (GRCS), that quantifies semantic-structural consensus of the reasoning space.<n>We also introduce Graph Self-Consistency (GSC), a medoid-based decoding strategy that trades nominal accuracy for reasoning fidelity.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-07-09T00:45:26Z) - Unveiling the Entropy Dynamics of Chain-of-Thought Reasoning [81.57028614960576]
We show that the Confidence Region possesses two critical properties: 1) High Reliability -- answers in the confidence region become highly accurate and stable, and 2) High Redundancy -- models generate unnecessary tokens long after reaching the correct answer.<n>These properties unlock more efficient and reliable inference strategies.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-06-01T10:11:14Z) - 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) - Three Regimes of Context-Parametric Conflict: A Predictive Framework and Empirical Validation [0.0]
We study how large language models handle conflict between their training knowledge and a contradicting document.<n>We propose a three-regime framework: Regime 1 (single-source updating), Regime 2 (competitive integration), and Regime 3 (task-appropriate selection)<n>We validate the framework across Claude Sonnet 4.6, GPT-5.5, Gemini 2.5 Flash, Llama 4 Maverick, and DeepSeek V3 using 9,970 API calls in three experimental phases.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-05-12T06:00:48Z) - RFEval: Benchmarking Reasoning Faithfulness under Counterfactual Reasoning Intervention in Large Reasoning Models [5.733004743054914]
Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) exhibit strong performance, yet often produce rationales that sound plausible but fail to reflect their true decision process.<n>We introduce a formal framework for reasoning faithfulness, defined by two testable conditions.<n>We present RFEval, a benchmark of 7,186 instances that probes faithfulness via controlled, output-level counterfactual interventions.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-02-19T03:49:37Z) - Robust Fine-tuning of Zero-shot Models via Variance Reduction [56.360865951192324]
When fine-tuning zero-shot models, our desideratum is for the fine-tuned model to excel in both in-distribution (ID) and out-of-distribution (OOD)
We propose a sample-wise ensembling technique that can simultaneously attain the best ID and OOD accuracy without the trade-offs.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-11-11T13:13:39Z) - Faithful Chain-of-Thought Reasoning [51.21714389639417]
Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting boosts Language Models' (LM) performance on a gamut of reasoning tasks.
We propose Faithful CoT, a reasoning framework involving two stages: Translation and Problem Solving.
This guarantees that the reasoning chain provides a faithful explanation of the final answer.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-01-31T03:04:26Z) - Causal Expectation-Maximisation [70.45873402967297]
We show that causal inference is NP-hard even in models characterised by polytree-shaped graphs.
We introduce the causal EM algorithm to reconstruct the uncertainty about the latent variables from data about categorical manifest variables.
We argue that there appears to be an unnoticed limitation to the trending idea that counterfactual bounds can often be computed without knowledge of the structural equations.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-11-04T10:25:13Z) - PRover: Proof Generation for Interpretable Reasoning over Rules [81.40404921232192]
We propose a transformer-based model that answers binary questions over rule-bases and generates the corresponding proofs.
Our model learns to predict nodes and edges corresponding to proof graphs in an efficient constrained training paradigm.
We conduct experiments on synthetic, hand-authored, and human-paraphrased rule-bases to show promising results for QA and proof generation.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-10-06T15:47:53Z)
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.