Reasoning Topology Matters: Network-of-Thought for Complex Reasoning Tasks

Enhancing the reasoning capability of large language models (LLMs) remains a core challenge in natural language processing. The Chain-of-Thought (CoT) paradigm dominates practical applications for its single-round efficiency, yet its reasoning chains often exhibit logical gaps. While multi-round paradigms like Graph-of-Thoughts (GoT), Tree-of-Thoughts (ToT), and Atom of Thought (AoT) achieve strong performance and reveal effective reasoning structures, their high cost limits practical use. To address this problem, this paper proposes a topology-based method for optimizing reasoning chains. The framework embeds essential topological patterns of effective reasoning into the lightweight CoT paradigm. Using persistent homology, we map CoT, ToT, and GoT into a unified topological space to quantify their structural features. On this basis, we design a unified optimization system: a Topological Optimization Agent diagnoses deviations in CoT chains from desirable topological characteristics and simultaneously generates targeted strategies to repair these structural deficiencies. Compared with multi-round reasoning methods like ToT and GoT, experiments on multiple datasets show that our approach offers a superior balance between reasoning accuracy and efficiency, showcasing a practical solution to ``single-round generation with multi-round intelligence''.

Large Language Models (LLMs) excel at multi-step reasoning, yet increasing the structural complexity of inference does not consistently improve system-level returns. Methods such as Tree of Thoughts (ToT), Graph of Thoughts (GoT), and Adaptive Graph of Thoughts (AGoT) can boost accuracy on some benchmarks, but often introduce substantial overhead in token consumption and latency, and their gains can be unstable across task distributions-sometimes underperforming simpler Chain-of-Thought (CoT) or direct input-output prompting (IO). We attribute this inefficiency to stage-wise and node-wise heterogeneity inside GoT-style reasoning pipelines: high-quality planning and final synthesis are globally coupled and typically benefit from strong models, whereas many intermediate subtasks are localized and can be solved accurately by lighter models with far fewer tokens. Motivated by these observations, we propose RouteGoT, a budget-controllable, node-adaptive routing framework for graph-structured reasoning. RouteGoT performs in-graph routing by prioritizing strong models for planning and synthesis, while dynamically allocating lightweight models and cost-effective strategies to leaf subtasks based on predicted difficulty. It further integrates explicit budget constraints into a global inference scheduler to control graph expansion under a user-specified token budget, enabling predictable performance-cost trade-offs. Experiments across reasoning, retrieval, and multi-hop QA benchmarks show that RouteGoT matching or improving accuracy while substantially reducing token usage; specifically, it achieves an average 8.1 percentage points accuracy improvement and 79.1% output token reduction compared to AGoT. Furthermore, RouteGoT outperforms existing routing baselines by maintaining a superior cost-accuracy trade-off, demonstrating improved robustness under varying budget targets and tasks.

Long chain-of-thought~(CoT) reasoning improves the problem-solving capability of large reasoning models~(LRMs), but often incurs substantial inference cost and overthinking. Existing efficiency methods primarily rely on prompting, post-hoc compression, or length-regularized optimization; these approaches can be sensitive to model scale, depend on external estimators, or under-allocate reasoning to difficult instances. We propose Draft-Thinking, a lightweight adaptation framework that learns a model-adapted draft CoT: a compact, self-contained working derivation that directly supports the final answer. We identify a Cross-Scale Draft Mismatch: concise traces generated by a strong teacher can be too sparse for a smaller target model. To address this mismatch, Progressive Draft Adaptation first transfers a concise reasoning-form prior through supervised fine-tuning (SFT) and then applies two-stage reinforcement learning (RL) with progressively harder data and relaxed response budgets to calibrate the reasoning granularity to the target model. The method requires neither post-hoc trajectory compression nor an explicit length-penalty reward. At inference time, draft, adaptive, and step-by-step prompts provide efficiency-oriented, balanced, and detailed reasoning modes, respectively. The step-by-step mode largely preserves the original model's accuracy while using fewer tokens. With only 847 training problems and 120 RL optimization steps, Draft-Thinking substantially reduces reasoning cost across six mathematical and scientific reasoning benchmarks. On MATH500, its draft mode reduces the average response length from 5,668 to 986 tokens, an 82.6% reduction, while achieving 90.6% accuracy compared with 93.0% for the original long CoT model.