Adaptive Reasoning in Language Models

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.

Large language model (LLM)-based agents have demonstrated strong capabilities on complex tasks. They typically perform reasoning before each action throughout an interaction trajectory. However, reasoning may not be necessary at every turn, as reasoning produced earlier can continue to support subsequent actions. A key challenge is therefore to determine when existing reasoning remains sufficient and when a new reasoning step is needed, without relying on costly generation-based verification. We find that decreases in the likelihood of subsequent reference actions after removing additional reasoning closely track whether those actions remain recoverable given earlier reasoning, providing an effective and lightweight signal for estimating cross-turn action support. Based on this observation, we propose Reasoning Adaptation through Cross-Turn Estimation (RACE), a training approach for adaptive agent reasoning. RACE introduces a Likelihood-Guided Progressive Reasoning Cover Detection (LoGiC) procedure that progressively identifies reasoning turns whose removal has limited impact on the current and subsequent reference actions. The resulting removal signals are incorporated into both supervised fine-tuning and agentic reinforcement learning, enabling the policy to learn when to reason and when to act directly. Extensive experiments on four representative agent benchmarks show that RACE substantially reduces reasoning cost while maintaining or improving task performance.

Large reasoning models improve performance on challenging problems by allocating additional computation before answering, but longer reasoning does not always lead to better results and can introduce substantial redundant reasoning on simple problems. Conversely, aggressively shortening reasoning can degrade performance on difficult ones. Effective reasoning therefore requires dynamically deciding when additional computation is useful based on the reasoner's capabilities and evolving solution state. Existing approaches often rely on predefined budgets or intervention rules, retrain the target reasoner, or require additional supervision. We introduce MetaCtrl, a lightweight controller that adaptively regulates a frozen reasoner without predefined token budgets or reasoner retraining. We formulate reasoning regulation as a sequential metacognitive control problem: MetaCtrl observes the evolving reasoning trace and decides whether to continue, simplify, skip redundant steps, or conclude reasoning. It is trained directly with reinforcement learning using a reward that prioritizes correctness while favoring shorter trajectories among correct solutions, requiring neither supervised intervention trajectories nor problem-specific budgets. Across seven benchmarks spanning mathematics, science, and code, MetaCtrl consistently improves the accuracy of LRMs while reducing their reasoning length. On DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-7B, it improves average accuracy by 4.7 points while reducing generation length by 53.3%. Without further training, the same controller transfers to an unseen reasoner (e.g., Qwen3-14B), improving average accuracy by 2.9 points and reducing generation length by 50.3%. These results establish MetaCtrl as a plug-and-play controller for improving reasoning accuracy while substantially reducing inference-time generation. The code is available at https://github.com/binbin2xs/MetaCtrl.

We present Hunyuan-A13B, an open-source large language model based on a Mixture-of-Experts architecture. It contains 80 billion total parameters but activates only 13 billion during inference, balancing model capability, computational efficiency, and deployment cost. The model is pretrained on a rigorously filtered 20T-token corpus with enhanced STEM data curation, improving factual reliability and reasoning ability. High-quality supervised fine-tuning and large-scale reinforcement learning further enhance its overall performance. Hunyuan-A13B also introduces a dual-mode Chain-of-Thought framework that adapts reasoning depth to task complexity: fast thinking for routine queries and slow thinking for complex, multi-step problems. Evaluations show competitive performance across mathematics, science, programming, general language understanding, and agent tasks, often approaching that of much larger models. Its high inference throughput makes it suitable for latency-sensitive applications. We release Hunyuan-A13B to support open research and practical LLM deployment.

Low-rank adaptation introduces a static learned update applied identically to every input. The update provides task-level adaptation but does not explicitly represent token-level or instance-level state variation. A family of adapters is proposed that introduces selective state-space control at two complementary granularities. At the token level, MaLoRA (Mamba-modulated low-rank adaptation) makes the adapter's scaling factor a dynamic input-dependent function with recurrent state across tokens, in contrast to the stateless modulators of prior work. The token-level adapter improves over low-rank adaptation. On the other hand, it differentiates tokens by structural role but not by contextual relevance, which motivates placing evidence selection at the context level. At the context level, MaRA (Mamba Retrieval Adapter) tracks cross-segment reasoning state and selects the segments most relevant to the query. State-space controlled retrieval of approximately three million parameters exceeds an eight-billion-parameter dense retriever on supporting-paragraph recall. Although base models perform poorly on the task without adaptation (14 to 25 F1), MaRA recovers the evidence relevance latent in their representations. Across three frozen backbones and two multi-hop reasoning benchmarks, the end-to-end family improves reasoning accuracy on every cell of the 3-by-2 grid, by +6.4 F1 (+10.0% relative) on average over the LoRA baseline.

Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) often follow a fixed Think-then-Answer paradigm, which is inefficient in heterogeneous multitask settings because simple inputs may not require explicit reasoning while difficult ones can benefit substantially from it. Learning when to think is also unstable during post-training, where imbalanced rollouts can drive the model toward always-thinking or always-direct behavior. We propose Switch-Reasoner, a GRPO-based framework that learns to adaptively select reasoning modes for MLLMs. It treats thinking as a virtual tool invocation and allows the model to either answer directly or invoke explicit reasoning before answering. To stabilize this decision, we introduce a dual-level regulation mechanism that balances the overall use of Thinking Mode and Direct Mode while providing sample-level supervision based on the relative benefit of the two choices. Experiments on 11 multimodal tasks show that Switch-Reasoner reduces unnecessary reasoning while maintaining strong performance, achieving a better accuracy-efficiency trade-off.

Despite remarkable performance on complex tasks, Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) often generate excessively long Chain-of-Thoughts (CoT), inflating computational costs even for simple queries. Existing efforts to mitigate this inefficiency typically rely on discrete reasoning modes or fixed budget tiers, lacking a principled criterion of when reasoning is sufficient. In this work, we introduce Minimal Sufficient CoT (MSC), defined as the shortest prefix of a CoT trajectory which is adequate for producing the correct answer. We empirically show that MSC not only reduces reasoning tokens, but also improves accuracy across difficulty levels. Building on MSC, we propose Sufficiency-guided Continuous Adaptive Reasoning (SuCo), a two-stage training framework for autonomous reasoning control along a continuous spectrum. In stage 1, MSC-Aligned Fine-Tuning (MFT) constructs MSC data using problem-adaptive sufficiency thresholds that naturally scale with question difficulty, then fine-tunes the model to internalize concise yet sufficient reasoning patterns. In stage 2, Sufficiency-Aware Policy Optimization (SAPO) further optimizes the model through reinforcement learning with dynamic complexity tracking and sufficiency-aware rewards that penalize both over- and under-thinking. Extensive experiments across mathematics, code, and science benchmarks show that SuCo consistently achieves improvements in both accuracy and reasoning efficiency.

Chain-of-thought (CoT) prompting improves reasoning in large language models (LLMs) by externalizing intermediate computation as discrete text tokens, but this textual interface also introduces redundancy and inference overhead. Latent reasoning offers a promising alternative by carrying part of the computation in continuous representations. However, existing methods typically predefine when latent computation is invoked and how it is allocated during decoding, leaving a key problem unresolved: when to invoke latent computation, what type of computation to perform, and how much budget to allocate. We propose Typed Latent Reasoning (Tyler), a typed and budget-aware framework for latent reasoning during autoregressive decoding. Tyler learns a policy that, at each decoding step, chooses between emitting a text token and switching to a latent computation module specialized for a particular reasoning function. Once invoked, an operator maps the current reasoning state into latent tokens that support global planning, local state updates, or reusable procedural abstraction. Across extensive experiments on three backbone LLMs, Tyler improves accuracy by up to 14.49 points over CoT and by up to 4.30 points over the strongest competing baseline. It further generalizes across diverse reasoning domains and achieves the best final-stage performance with the lowest forgetting.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have achieved remarkable performance in complex reasoning tasks through Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting. However, this approach often leads to ``over-thinking,'' where models generate unnecessarily long reasoning traces for simple queries and incur avoidable inference cost. While recent work has explored adaptive reasoning, existing methods typically make a single query-level decision about whether to reason. This overlooks the dynamic nature of multi-step tasks, where the need for explicit reasoning varies across intermediate stages. To address this limitation, we introduce AdaptR1, a Reinforcement Learning (RL) based framework for adaptive interleaved thinking in multi-hop Question Answering (QA). Unlike previous approaches that require Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT) for cold-start initialization, AdaptR1 uses a fully RL-based strategy with a quality-gated efficiency reward to dynamically allocate reasoning budgets at each step. Under the Graph-R1 setting, AdaptR1 reduces average think tokens by 69.71%, with a 90.35% reduction on HotpotQA, while maintaining performance comparable to or better than standard baselines. Furthermore, our analysis reveals that overthinking in multi-hop reasoning is not uniformly distributed but occurs predominantly during the initial planning stages, highlighting the effectiveness of step-wise adaptive budget allocation.

Languages encode distinct abstractions and inductive priors, yet most large language models (LLMs) overlook this diversity by reasoning in a single dominant language. In this work, we introduce x1, a family of reasoning models that can adaptively reason in an advantageous language on a per-instance basis. To isolate the effect of reasoning-language choice, x1 is constructed without expanding the model's knowledge boundaries and is trained by contrasting linguistically distinct reasoning trajectories for the same input. Our extensive experiments demonstrate the benefits of adaptive multilingual reasoning across multilingual mathematical reasoning and culturally grounded tasks. Moreover, our results challenge a simplistic view of scaling laws: while scaling reduces cross-lingual disparities in procedural domains such as math reasoning, it does not eliminate the advantages of culture-associated languages in culturally grounded tasks, as we empirically show that such reasoning enables more efficient and accurate cultural knowledge recall. Overall, our findings establish language choice as a functional component of reasoning, with implications for building more generalist and globally competent reasoning models.

Embodied navigation agents built upon large reasoning models (LRMs) can handle complex, multimodal environmental input and perform grounded reasoning per step to improve sequential decision-making for long-horizon tasks. However, a critical question remains: how can the reasoning capabilities of LRMs be harnessed intelligently and efficiently for long-horizon navigation tasks? In simple scenes, agents are expected to act reflexively, while in complex ones they should engage in deliberate reasoning before acting.To achieve this, we introduce Hybrid ReasOning Navigation (HiRO-Nav) agent, the first kind of agent capable of adaptively determining whether to perform thinking at every step based on its own action entropy. Specifically, by examining how the agent's action entropy evolves over the navigation trajectories, we observed that only a small fraction of actions exhibit high entropy, and these actions often steer the agent toward novel scenes or critical objects. Furthermore, studying the relationship between action entropy and task completion (i.e., Q-value) reveals that improving high-entropy actions contributes more positively to task success.Hence, we propose a tailored training pipeline comprising hybrid supervised fine-tuning as a cold start, followed by online reinforcement learning with the proposed hybrid reasoning strategy to explicitly activate reasoning only for high-entropy actions, significantly reducing computational overhead while improving decision quality. Extensive experiments on the CHORES-$\mathbb{S}$ ObjectNav benchmark showcases that HiRO-Nav achieves a better trade-off between success rates and token efficiency than both dense-thinking and no-thinking baselines.

The emergence of large reasoning models demonstrates that scaling inference-time compute significantly enhances performance on complex tasks. However, it often falls into another trap: overthinking simple problems, where repetitive rationales yield minimal accuracy gains at a disproportionately high cost. This motivates adaptive reasoning: dynamically aligning reasoning depth with instance difficulty. In this paper, we study adaptive reasoning from an optimality perspective, formalizing it as a utility maximization problem where tokens are allocated until the marginal accuracy gain falls below the incremental cost. Based on this, we propose CODA (Compute Allocation by Difficulty Awareness), a method that operationalizes this principle by allocating tokens via a policy-internal difficulty signal. Specifically, CODA estimates difficulty via group-based rollouts and maps it to two non-negative gates that modulate a length-dependent shaping term on top of the binary base reward. The easy-side gate penalizes verbosity on simple instances, whereas the hard-side gate encourages more deliberative rollouts on challenging ones. Across model scales and benchmarks, CODA achieves adaptive reasoning without external annotations or user-provided budgets: on easy tasks, CODA reduces token costs by over 60% while maintaining strong accuracy, whereas on hard tasks it incentivizes more deliberative rollouts to maximize performance.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable progress in reasoning across diverse domains. However, effective reasoning in real-world tasks requires adapting the reasoning strategy to the demands of the problem, ranging from fast, intuitive responses to deliberate, step-by-step reasoning and tool-augmented thinking. Drawing inspiration from cognitive psychology, we propose a novel taxonomy of LLM reasoning strategies along two knowledge boundaries: a fast/slow boundary separating intuitive from deliberative processes, and an internal/external boundary distinguishing reasoning grounded in the model's parameters from reasoning augmented by external tools. We systematically survey recent work on adaptive reasoning in LLMs and categorize methods based on key decision factors. We conclude by highlighting open challenges and future directions toward more adaptive, efficient, and reliable LLMs.