Large reasoning models (LRMs) achieve strong performance through extended reasoning traces, but they often exhibit overthinking behavior for low-complexity queries. Existing efforts to mitigate this issue are fundamentally limited by unstable accuracy-efficiency trade-offs and poor robustness to heterogeneous reasoning behaviors. To address these challenges, we propose a two-stage framework for stable adaptive thinking in LRMs. The framework first applies Hybrid Fine-Tuning to expose the model to both thinking and no-thinking behaviors, establishing well-conditioned initialization. It then performs adaptive reinforcement learning with Correctness-Preserving Advantage Shaping (CPAS) to avoid suppressing correct long-chain reasoning, and Length-Aware Gradient Regulation (LAGR) to stabilize optimization under severe reasoning-length heterogeneity. Extensive experiments on Qwen2.5-1.5B and 7B show consistent improvements over strong baselines, achieving up to +3.7/+3.6 accuracy points while reducing generated tokens by 40.6%/43.9%. Further analyses across varying problem difficulties and out-of-distribution tasks confirm the robustness and generalization of our approach.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Illustration of efficient reasoning methods.
Figure 2: Overview of our two-stage training pipeline. Stage 1 performs Hybrid Fine-Tuning (HFT) on paired thinking and no-thinking formats to initialize a unified policy. Stage 2 applies GRPO-style reinforcement learning with correctness-preserving advantage shaping (CPAS) and length-aware gradient regulation (LAGR) to stabilize optimization under extreme length heterogeneity and to learn when to think.
Method
MATH-500
AIME-2024
AIME-2025
Average
Acc
Len
RatioNT
Acc
Len
RatioNT
Acc
Len
RatioNT
Δ Acc
Δ Len
Qwen-2.5-1.5B
Thinking
80.4
10441
0.0%
25.7
35829
0.0%
20.6
36977
0.0%
0.0
+0.0%
No-Thinking
60.4
2320
100.0%
9.1
10751
100.0%
7.5
11150
100.0%
-16.6
-70.9%
HFT
72.3
7106
42.4%
16.8
23673
54.2%
14.5
25376
46.2%
-7.4
-32.5%
O1-Pruner
77.1
7043
0.0%
20.3
33417
0.0%
16.7
32185
0.0%
-4.2
-12.7%
Table 1: Overall performance on MATH-500, AIME-2024, and AIME-2025 for Qwen2.5 series models. Len is the average number of generated tokens per example. RatioNT denotes the fraction of examples solved in NoThinking mode. ΔAcc and ΔLen are computed relative to the always-Thinking baseline of the same base model.
Figure 3: Difficulty-aware mode selection and performance. (a) Performance of Two Think Mode on MATH-500, AIME-2024, and AIME-2025. (b) Mode ratio across MATH-500 difficulty levels. (c) Accuracy across difficulty levels, comparing our adaptive policy with always-Thinking and always-No-Thinking baselines.
Figure 4: Ablation and sensitivity analysis. (a) Training dynamics with/without CPAS: mean response length (left) and AIME-2024 accuracy (right). (b) Effect of the LAGR length-weight parameter β (left) and the control-token boost factor λ (right) on accuracy and the no-thinking ratio.
Method
GPQA
Acc
Len
Ratio NT
Δ Len
Thinking
47.5
24135
0.0%
–
No-Thinking
35.3
8031
100.0%
-66.7%
HFT
41.8
16849
44.1%
-30.2%
Ours
50.4
11826
31.3%
-51.0%
Table 2: OOD Performance on GPQA Dataset.
Method
MATH-500
AIME-2024
AIME-2025
Acc
Len
RatioNT
Acc
Len
RatioNT
Acc
Len
RatioNT
Qwen-2.5-1.5B
Thinking
80.4
10441
0.0%
25.7
35829
0.0%
20.6
36977
0.0%
No-Thinking
60.4
2320
100.0%
9.1
10751
100.0%
7.5
11150
100.0%
HFT
72.3
7106
42.4%
16.8
23673
54.2%
14.5
25376
46.2%
Ours
84.6
4176
69.8%
28.1
23258
3.7%
25.2
22062
5.4%
Table 3: Appendix Results on Diverse Model Sizes and Architectures.
Figure 5: For an example from MATH-500, the Thinking baseline generates a long chain-of-thought with redundant intermediate steps. In contrast, our method chooses NoThinking and directly produces a concise final solution, using 713 tokens in total.
Figure 6: For an example from AIME, the Thinking baseline generates a long chain-of-thought with redundant intermediate steps. In contrast, our method chooses NoThinking and directly produces a concise final solution, using 2977 tokens in total.
Figure 7: For an example from GPQA, the Thinking baseline generates a long chain-of-thought with redundant intermediate steps. In contrast, our method chooses NoThinking and directly produces a concise final solution, using 2197 tokens in total.
Large reasoning models (LRMs) achieve strong performance by externalizing explicit reasoning traces before producing the answer, yet suffer from overthinking challenge that allocates uniformly heavy computation to queries of varying difficulty. While proprietary models mitigate this via opaque routing, open-source LRMs still lack an efficient mechanism to internalize adaptive reasoning due to both expensive training cost and limited disclosure of training recipes. In response, we introduce RPO (Root-token Policy Optimization), a framework that enables LRMs to self-determine when to reason by training only the initial root token (e.g., whether to invoke the <think> tag) via group relative reward and group-wise advantages. By focusing on this pivotal branching point, RPO drastically reduces training overhead and VRAM usage. Across multiple model families and scales, RPO learns difficulty-aware adaptive thinking at just ~2% of the training compute of prior adaptive-reasoning methods.
Taehyeon Kim, Hyunsoo Lee, Youngsoo Jang +1
LG AI Research · UNIST · University of Illinois Chicago
By incorporating test-time compute scaling, large reasoning models (LRMs) can solve complex problems through explicit chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning processes. However, they often suffer from overthinking, resulting in redundant token outputs and degraded accuracy. Current methods to mitigate this issue remain limited: training-based approaches require substantial computational resources, while training-free methods rely on well-crafted prompts or unreliable confidence signals. In this work, we investigate early stopping from the perspective of attention distributions and propose a simple method, ASAG, which infers the model's reasoning state and adaptively adjusts the generation strategy. The proposed framework is training-free and plug-and-play, enabling seamless integration into existing LRMs. Extensive experiments on nine benchmarks demonstrate consistent improvements across mainstream LRMs with varying parameter scales, including the DeepSeek-R1-Distill and Qwen3 series. Specifically, ASAG improves average accuracy by 3.2% while reducing the number of generated tokens by nearly 40% across all reasoning tasks on Qwen3-8B.
Jiakai Li, Ke Qin, Rongzheng Wang +4
University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China · Ubiquitous Intelligence and Trusted Services Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, Chengdu, China
Large reasoning models (LRMs) like OpenAI o1 and DeepSeek-R1 achieve high accuracy on complex tasks by adopting long chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning paths. However, the inherent verbosity of these processes frequently results in redundancy and overthinking. To address this issue, existing works leverage Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO) to reduce LRM output length, but their static length reward design cannot dynamically adapt according to the relative problem difficulty and response length distribution, causing over-compression and compromised accuracy. Therefore, we propose SmartThinker, a novel GRPO-based efficient reasoning method with progressive CoT length calibration. SmartThinker makes a two-fold contribution: First, it dynamically estimates the optimal length with peak accuracy during training and guides overlong responses toward it to reduce response length while sustaining accuracy. Second, it dynamically modulates the length reward coefficient to avoid the unwarranted penalization of correct reasoning paths. Extensive experiment results show that SmartThinker achieves up to 52.5% average length compression with improved accuracy, and achieves up to 16.6% accuracy improvement on challenging benchmarks like AIME25. The source code can be found at https://github.com/SJTU-RTEAS/SmartThinker.
Chenzhi Hu, Qinzhe Hu, Yuhang Xu +6
Shanghai Jiao Tong University · Beihang University