Mitigating Overthinking in Large Reasoning Language Models via Reasoning Path Deviation Monitoring
Organizations: Institute of Information Engineering, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China · School of Cyberspace Security, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China · School of Computer and Artificial Intelligence, Jiangxi University of Finance and Economics, Jiangxi, China · Xiaomi EV
Abstract
Large Reasoning Language Models (LRLMs) demonstrate impressive capabilities on complex tasks by utilizing long Chain-of-Thought reasoning. However, they are prone to overthinking, which generates redundant reasoning steps that degrade both performance and efficiency. Recently, early-exit strategies are proposed to mitigate overthinking by dynamically and adaptively terminating redundant reasoning. However, current early-exit methods either introduce extra training overhead by relying on proxy models or limit inference throughput due to the frequent content switching between reasoning and generating probing answers. Moreover, most early-exit methods harm LRLMs performance due to over-truncation. Our insight stems from an observation: overthinking often causes LRLMs to deviate from the correct reasoning path, which is frequently accompanied by high-entropy transition tokens. Given this, we propose an early-exit method deeply coupled with the native reasoning process, which leverages the path deviation index as a dedicated monitoring metric for the frequent occurrence of high-entropy transition tokens to dynamically detect and terminate overthinking trajectories. We conduct experiments across multiple benchmarks using LRLMs of different types and scales, and the results indicate that our method delivers the largest performance improvement over vanilla CoT compared to existing early-exit methods.
Figures & tables
| Math Easy | Math Hard | Scientific | Average | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Method | Acc. | Len. | Acc. | Len. | Acc. | Len. | Acc. | Len. |
| DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-7B | 87.9 | 3801 | 32.5 | 10395 | 32.3 | 10319 | 56.2 | 7558 |
| + NoThinking | 77.6 -10.3 | 912 | 25.2 -7.3 | 3277 | 31.3 -1.0 | 841 | 48.5 -7.7 | 1915 |
| + ThinkLess | 76.8 -11.1 | 758 | 24.7 -7.8 | 3736 | 31.8 -0.5 | 1175 | 48.0 -8.2 | 2094 |
| + Dynasor-CoT | 73.8 -14.1 | 1673 | 32.4 -0.1 | 3366 | 45.5 +13.2 | 1876 | 52.0 -4.2 | 2428 |
| + DEER | 85.4 -2.5 | 2733 | 45.0 +12.5 | 9005 | 28.3 -4.0 | 9433 | 59.9 +3.7 | 6378 |
| Method | Math | Math | Scientific | Average |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Easy | Hard | |||
| Vanilla CoT | 91.6 | 52.9 | 52.0 | 67.6 |
| RPDI-EE | 93.5 | 61.0 | 64.7 | 75.5 |
| w/o GTF | 93.5 | 57.7 | 64.7 | 74.0 |
| w/o LTF | 90.2 | 56.4 | 62.1 | 71.7 |
| w/o BTM | 93.6 | 53.5 | 67.7 | 72.7 |
Appendix figures & tables5 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
| Method | Probing-free | Proxy-Model-free | Dynamic Method | Efficiency Gain | Performance Gain | Real-time |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RPDI (Ours) | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Answer-Probing Based | ||||||
| Deer ( Yang et al., 2025b ) | ✗ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Adaptive Think ( Yong et al., 2025 ) | ✗ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✗ |
| Dynasor-CoT ( Fu et al., 2025 ) | ✗ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✗ | ✓ |
| Proxy-Model Based | ||||||
Overthinking in Language Models
Overthinking in language models studies when extra reasoning becomes redundant or harmful, and how to control it without losing accuracy.
See all 68 papers