Forethought: Verifiable Reasoning from Neurosymbolic Primitive Programming

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.04096v1
• Date: Sun, 05 Jul 2026 03:20:23 GMT
• Title: Forethought: Verifiable Reasoning from Neurosymbolic Primitive Programming
• Abstract summary: Forethought is a neurosymbolic reasoning system that treats reasoning as an explicit, verifiable program.<n>It improves base-model accuracy by about 30% relative and outperforms vanilla prompting, reinforcement learning scaffolds, and prompt-evolution methods.
• Score: 0.764671395172401
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Current agentic workflows usually involve decomposing user requests into sequences of tool calls with correctly resolved parameters, the results of which are processed through reasoning traces in the language model's context window. The prevailing route to improve such reasoning is test-time scaling, which trains models to search over long chains of thought; but the resulting capability is entangled in model weights, is not verifiable step-by-step, and is costly at inference. We present Forethought, a neurosymbolic reasoning system that instead treats reasoning as an explicit, verifiable program, that builds from a library of symbolic and neural primitives which are composed through a domain-specific language. The result are reasoning programs, which are concrete representations of the model's work, and as such can be inspected and modified before deployment. Instantiated as a tool-calling execution kernel and evaluated across five benchmarks, Forethought improves base-model accuracy by about 30% relative and outperforms vanilla prompting, reinforcement learning scaffolds, and prompt-evolution methods, enabling small models to match or exceed frontier models capabilities. In a direct comparison, a non-reasoning model augmented with Forethought competes with a dedicated reasoning model while requiring roughly three orders of magnitude less post-training investment, and remains model-agnostic and auditable.

Related papers

• Is Code Better Than Language for Algorithmic Reasoning [58.86873062890482]
  We show that for tool-augmented language models, comparing natural-language reasoning with code-execution pipelines is difficult because the comparison changes both the intermediate representation and the execution mechanism.<n>We separate these factors with an intermediate intervention: the model expresses its reasoning as executable code, and the language model simulates that code in context to produce an answer.<n>We observe that the intermediate intervention is not meaningfully different from natural-language reasoning (+0.15pp)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-14T04:17:21Z)
• Playing Psychic: Using Thought Trees to Predict Reasoning Models Accuracy on Coding Tasks [7.675768582345005]
  We study frontier reasoning models to understand their performance on real-world coding benchmarks.<n>We propose structured thought-trees as means to represent reasoning traces.<n>We show that flagging and retrying structurally anomalous traces based on the extracted features yields consistent gains at lower complexity levels.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-18T09:30:36Z)
• Reasoning Relay: Evaluating Stability and Interchangeability of Large Language Models in Mathematical Reasoning [8.01259760303241]
  We investigate whether a partially completed reasoning chain can be reliably continued by another model.<n>We use token-level log-probability thresholds to truncate reasoning at early, mid, and late stages from our baseline models.<n>Our findings point towards interchangeability as an emerging behavioral property of reasoning models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-16T02:56:44Z)
• CoSineVerifier: Tool-Augmented Answer Verification for Computation-Oriented Scientific Questions [32.14674040685995]
  We introduce model, a tool-augmented verifier that leverages external rubrics to perform precise computations and symbolic simplifications.<n>Experiments conducted on STEM subjects, general QA, and long-form reasoning tasks demonstrates strong generalization of model.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-01T03:08:43Z)
• Beyond Memorization: Extending Reasoning Depth with Recurrence, Memory and Test-Time Compute Scaling [60.63703438729223]
  We show how different architectures and training methods affect model multi-step reasoning capabilities.<n>We confirm that increasing model depth plays a crucial role for sequential computations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-22T18:57:08Z)
• Accelerated Test-Time Scaling with Model-Free Speculative Sampling [58.69141724095398]
  We introduce STAND (STochastic Adaptive N-gram Drafting), a novel model-free speculative decoding approach.<n>We show that STAND reduces inference latency by 60-65% compared to standard autoregressive decoding.<n>As a model-free approach, STAND can be applied to any existing language model without additional training.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-05T07:31:18Z)
• Self-Route: Automatic Mode Switching via Capability Estimation for Efficient Reasoning [36.470695895695044]
  Self-Route is a dynamic reasoning framework that automatically selects between general and reasoning modes.<n>We show that Self-Route achieves comparable accuracy to reasoning models while reducing token consumption by 30-55%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-27T03:18:31Z)
• Model Utility Law: Evaluating LLMs beyond Performance through Mechanism Interpretable Metric [99.56567010306807]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have become indispensable across academia, industry, and daily applications.<n>One core challenge of evaluation in the large language model (LLM) era is the generalization issue.<n>We propose Model Utilization Index (MUI), a mechanism interpretability enhanced metric that complements traditional performance scores.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-10T04:09:47Z)
• Scaling up Test-Time Compute with Latent Reasoning: A Recurrent Depth Approach [70.44265766483633]
  We study a novel language model architecture that is capable of scaling test-time computation by implicitly reasoning in latent space.<n>Our model works by iterating a recurrent block, thereby unrolling to arbitrary depth at test-time.<n>We show that the resulting model can improve its performance on reasoning benchmarks, sometimes dramatically.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-07T18:55:02Z)
• BRiTE: Bootstrapping Reinforced Thinking Process to Enhance Language Model Reasoning [78.63421517563056]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable capabilities in complex reasoning tasks.<n>We present a unified probabilistic framework that formalizes LLM reasoning through a novel graphical model.<n>We introduce the Bootstrapping Reinforced Thinking Process (BRiTE) algorithm, which works in two steps.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-31T02:39:07Z)

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.