Enhanced and Efficient Reasoning in Large Learning Models
Authors: Leslie G. Valiant
Organizations: John A. Paulson School of Engineering and Applied Sciences Harvard University, Boston, MA 02134
Abstract
In current Large Language Models we can trust the production of smoothly flowing prose on the basis of the principles of machine learning. However, there is no comparably principled basis to justify trust in the content of the text produced. It appears to be conventional wisdom that addressing this issue by adding more principled reasoning is not computationally affordable. Here we propose a principled method of reasoning that is efficient enough to be practical for large language models. Further, the method allows the retention of much of the currently used software and hardware base. Our method for improving the functioning of large language models consists of a first stage of preprocessing that recodes the data to a Unary Relational Integracode that is more explicit about the relationships among the objects described in the text, followed as a second stage by a standard but possibly streamlined machine learning process that then also learns to predict these relationships. The method may be viewed as realizing a world model and applying beyond natural language, to vision and actions, for example, where the multiple properties of an object referred to in an input are brought together explicitly, rather than remaining distributed in the various references to it in the input. We articulate its advantages in terms of Robust Logic, a system for performing principled chaining on learned, and hence uncertain, information. We show that this recoding has the surprising and fortuitous property that, while succinct, it makes the task of learning a core subset of relational rules that hold in the world described in the training data polynomial time learnable in a defined sense, the polynomial depending on the complexity of the rule. This gives support for sound reasoning within each single call of the learned classifier as well as between multiple calls.
Current answering paradigms for Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) often fail to account for the fact that some questions may lie beyond the model's operational capability boundary, leading to long but unproductive reasoning. In this paper, we study whether LRMs expose early signals predictive of such cases, and whether these signals can be used to mitigate unproductive reasoning. In black-box settings, we find that reasoning expressions contain failure-predictive signals. In white-box settings, we show that the hidden states of the last input token contain information that is predictive of whether a question will not be solved correctly under our evaluation setup. Building on these observations, we propose two test-time monitoring strategies: reasoning expression monitoring and hidden states monitoring, that reduce token usage by 62.7-93.6%, substantially improving efficiency and reliability while largely preserving accuracy.
To improve the reasoning capabilities of large language models, test-time compute is typically scaled by generating intermediate tokens before the final answer. However, this couples reasoning to autoregressive generation and thereby conflates internal computation with external communication. In contrast, human cognition can use working memory to hold and manipulate information internally without the need to externalize intermediate thoughts. Drawing on this principle, we introduce Reasoning in Memory (RiM), a latent reasoning method that replaces the autoregressive generation of reasoning steps with memory blocks. These memory blocks are fixed sequences of special tokens that unlock the working-memory capacity of large language models. Since they are fixed rather than generated, they can be processed in a single forward pass, enabling compute-efficient latent reasoning. To operationalize these memory blocks, we employ a two-stage curriculum. First, we ground them by predicting explicit reasoning steps after each memory block. Second, we discard this step-level supervision and iteratively refine the final answer after each memory block. Our experiments on reasoning benchmarks show that, across language models of different families and sizes, RiM matches or exceeds existing latent reasoning methods while avoiding the autoregressive generation of thoughts. These results demonstrate that large language models can be trained to use working memory as an effective mechanism for latent reasoning.
Reinforcement learning (RL) has become central to improving large language models (LLMs) on complex reasoning tasks, yet RL post-training is largely studied in isolation from the pretraining that precedes it. As a result, two basic questions remain open: (1) how do pretraining choices (model size, data) shape the returns to RL compute, and (2) what does RL actually do to the model? These questions are difficult to study in the standard LLM setting: pretraining corpora are vast and uncontrolled, making it hard to attribute behaviors to pretraining versus RL, and systematic compute sweeps across both stages are prohibitively expensive. To address these challenges, we use chess as a controlled testbed for studying reasoning across the full pretraining-to-post-training pipeline. We follow the standard LLM training pipeline by pretraining language models from 5M to 1B parameters on human chess games, supervised fine-tuning on synthetic reasoning traces, and running RL on chess puzzles with verifiable rewards. Using this framework, we find that the post-RL performance at given RL compute level is well-predicted from the pretraining loss, and slope of the RL reward curves improves approximately linearly with the pretraining tokens. Beyond scaling, we find that RL does not simply sharpen the SFT policy: on easy puzzles it amplifies correct moves the SFT policy already preferred, while on hard puzzles it surfaces correct moves that were nearly absent under SFT. We further test whether our findings transfer beyond chess by training a 1B language model on math-domain text, where the same predictive pattern emerges: longer-pretrained checkpoints reach higher post-RL performance and improve faster under RL. In sum, we provide a quantitative account of the pretraining-to-RL interface and a controlled testbed for studying the science of reasoning across the full pretraining-to-post-training pipeline.