Towards Understanding Pause Token Fine-Tuning Dynamics: A Mode Retention Perspective

State--prediction separation (SPS) relieves a language model's hidden state of two competing burdens---summarizing the context and predicting the next token---by splitting the forward pass into a state stream and a prediction stream. The separation works, but it is expensive: the prediction stream is a second pass over the whole backbone, costing $\sim$1.9$\times$ the pretraining FLOPs, and even more in terms of wall-clock time when using a flexible attention mask. This paper makes state--prediction separation almost free. We take the separation to its limit with a free pause token: a prediction stream that writes no keys or values at all and so rides the sequence's existing positions. It improves next-token prediction of a standard Transformer by 2-3 centinats in practice on a 1B parameter model, and because it adds no position it costs nothing at inference---no added context length, no KV cache, no decode steps, and essentially no latency, with the growth in inference flops typically irrelevant as it is not the active bottleneck on throughput. The cost is therefore entirely in training where we use four mechanisms to drive it down: a two-pass split that keeps FlashAttention kernels viable, the $w{=}0$ prediction window, a shared gated FFN that evaluates one FFN per position rather than one per stream, and phasing the separation onto the tail of the run. Together these bring the overhead versus an optimized pretraining pipeline to $1.33\times$ wall-clock while recovering ~94% of the gain compared to SPS, and to as low as $1.09\times$ along a graceful quality/compute tradeoff. Furthermore, the FFN optimization reduces the raw flops required at inference time. The result is an isoflop, isoparameter, and isotoken improvement over standard next token trained transformers.

Reasoning LLMs often continue reasoning after reaching a correct answer, wasting computation and sometimes replacing it with an incorrect one. Deciding when to stop is a metareasoning problem: the model must weigh what further reasoning could achieve against its cost, given what it can already answer. Direct utility training learns a stopping representation at a chosen token price; supporting new prices can require additional controller training. We introduce BELT (BELief-based Termination), which separates outcome prediction from stopping control. It learns beliefs about current and future answers from a frozen LLM's hidden states, then fits a linear stopping policy on the frozen features. The prediction targets are independent of token price, so one probe supports different accuracy-cost trade-offs through CPU policy refitting or threshold adjustment. Averaged over five out-of-distribution (OOD) math benchmarks, BELT reduces generated tokens by 41% on Qwen3-1.7B and 51% on OLMo-3-7B-Think without loss of accuracy. The same math-trained BELT transfers to coding and agentic tasks without training on code or agentic data. In all three domains, its accuracy-cost trade-offs are competitive with or better than those of end-to-end controllers. On OLMo3, its probe has 21.2x fewer parameters than one checkpoint of the strongest baseline, OS-Pruner, and needs 55x fewer training GPU-hours than OS-Pruner's five price-specific checkpoints.

Large language models demonstrate increasingly strong reasoning capabilities through effective post-training. Yet, prevailing post-training methods optimize over massive numbers of tokens, implicitly assuming that effective learning must be token-intensive. We revisit this assumption in the on-policy distillation (OPD) setting, which naturally admits dense teacher supervision at every generated token. Using the Qwen3 family, we discover a counter-intuitive phenomenon: reasoning can be effectively incentivized by an extremely small fraction of generated tokens--as few as one or two tokens per reasoning trajectory, corresponding to only 0.05% of all tokens. Surprisingly, this sparse supervision in most cases matches or surpasses full-token training in improving reasoning ability, despite excluding the vast majority of generated tokens from the training objective. This phenomenon is consistently observed across nine teacher--student configurations spanning different model scales on mathematical reasoning tasks, and is further validated on coding reasoning, Llama models and Proximal Policy Optimization (PPO)-based reinforcement learning with verifiable reward (RLVR). Interestingly, such extremely sparse supervision may be closer to the natural learning process: rather than correcting every step word by word, one reflects on a few critical reasoning steps, updates prior understanding, and continues the trial-and-error, avoiding micro-level corrections while remaining remarkably effective. Overall, our results challenge the assumption that effective post-training must be token-intensive and point to a new direction for understanding and designing more efficient post-training algorithms.