RLCM trains LLMs with a margin-enhanced process reward that widens the gap between correct and incorrect reasoning steps, improving calibration on math, code, logic, and science tasks without hurting accuracy.
Conformal thinking: Risk control for reasoning on a compute budget
3 Pith papers cite this work. Polarity classification is still indexing.
abstract
Reasoning Large Language Models (LLMs) enable test-time scaling, with dataset-level accuracy improving as the token budget increases, motivating adaptive reasoning -- spending tokens when they improve reliability and stopping early when additional computation is unlikely to help. However, setting the token budget, as well as the threshold for adaptive reasoning, is a practical challenge that entails a fundamental risk-accuracy trade-off. We re-frame the budget setting problem as risk control, limiting the error rate while minimizing compute. Our framework introduces an upper threshold that stops reasoning when the model is confident (risking incorrect output) and a novel parametric lower threshold that preemptively stops unsolvable instances (risking premature stoppage). Given a target risk and a validation set, we use distribution-free risk control to optimally specify these stopping mechanisms. For scenarios with multiple budget controlling criteria, we incorporate an efficiency loss to select the most computationally efficient exiting mechanism. Empirical results across diverse reasoning tasks and models demonstrate the effectiveness of our risk control approach, demonstrating computational efficiency gains from the lower threshold and ensemble stopping mechanisms while adhering to the user-specified risk target.
years
2026 3verdicts
UNVERDICTED 3representative citing papers
DAR lets LLMs interact dynamically with statutes for deontic reasoning, improving results on hard DeonticBench subsets but with uneven gains and higher token use for weaker models.
Simple thresholding on an external verifier signal, calibrated by risk control, performs competitively with sequential hypothesis testing monitors on math reasoning and red-teaming datasets.
citing papers explorer
-
Process Supervision of Confidence Margin for Calibrated LLM Reasoning
RLCM trains LLMs with a margin-enhanced process reward that widens the gap between correct and incorrect reasoning steps, improving calibration on math, code, logic, and science tasks without hurting accuracy.
-
DAR: Deontic Reasoning with Agentic Harnesses
DAR lets LLMs interact dynamically with statutes for deontic reasoning, improving results on hard DeonticBench subsets but with uneven gains and higher token use for weaker models.
-
Online Safety Monitoring for LLMs
Simple thresholding on an external verifier signal, calibrated by risk control, performs competitively with sequential hypothesis testing monitors on math reasoning and red-teaming datasets.