Implicit Reasoning in Language Models

The Stop-Think-AutoRegress Language Diffusion Model (STAR-LDM) integrates latent diffusion planning with autoregressive generation. Unlike conventional autoregressive language models limited to token-by-token decisions, STAR-LDM incorporates a "thinking" phase that pauses generation to refine a semantic plan through diffusion before continuing. This enables global planning in continuous space prior to committing to discrete tokens. Evaluations show STAR-LDM significantly outperforms similar-sized models on language understanding benchmarks and achieves $>70\%$ win rates in LLM-as-judge comparisons for narrative coherence and commonsense reasoning. The architecture also allows straightforward control through lightweight classifiers, enabling fine-grained steering of attributes without model retraining while maintaining better fluency-control trade-offs than specialized approaches.

Real-world requests to AI agents are fundamentally underspecified. Natural human communication relies on shared context and unstated constraints that speakers expect listeners to infer. Current agentic benchmarks test explicit instruction-following but fail to evaluate whether agents can reason about implicit requirements spanning accessibility needs, privacy boundaries, catastrophic risks, and contextual constraints. We present Implicit Intelligence, an evaluation framework testing whether AI agents can move beyond prompt-following to become genuine goal-fulfillers, paired with Agent-as-a-World (AaW), a harness where interactive worlds are defined in human-readable YAML files and simulated by language models. Our scenarios feature apparent simplicity in user requests, hidden complexity in correct solutions, and discoverability of constraints through environmental exploration. Evaluating 16 frontier and open-weight models across 205 scenarios, we find that even the best-performing model achieves only 48.3% scenario pass rate, revealing substantial room for improvement in bridging the gap between literal instruction-following and human-like contextual reasoning.

Current approaches to AI training treat reasoning as an emergent property of scale. We argue instead that robust reasoning emerges from linguistic self-reflection, itself internalized from high-quality social interaction. Drawing on Vygotskian developmental psychology, we advance three core positions centered on Introspection. First, we argue for the Social Genesis of the Private Mind: learning from conversational environments rises to prominence as a new way to make sense of the world; the friction of aligning with another agent, internal or not, refines and crystallizes the reasoning process. Second, we argue that dialogically scaffolded introspective experiences allow agents to engage in sense-making that decouples learning from immediate data streams, transforming raw environmental data into rich, learnable narratives. Finally, we contend that Dialogue Quality is the New Data Quality: the depth of an agent's private reasoning, and its efficiency regarding test-time compute, is determined by the diversity and rigor of the dialogues it has mastered. We conclude that optimizing these conversational scaffolds is the primary lever for the next generation of general intelligence.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable proficiency across diverse tasks, exhibiting emergent properties such as semantic prompt comprehension, In-Context Learning (ICL), and Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning. Despite their empirical success, the theoretical mechanisms driving these phenomena remain poorly understood. This study dives into the foundations of these observations by addressing three critical questions: (1) How do LLMs accurately decode prompt semantics despite being trained solely on a next-token prediction objective? (2) Through what mechanism does ICL facilitate performance gains without explicit parameter updates? and (3) Why do intermediate reasoning steps in CoT prompting effectively unlock capabilities for complex, multi-step problems? Our results demonstrate that, through the autoregressive process, LLMs are capable of exactly inferring the transition probabilities between tokens across distinct tasks using provided prompts. We show that ICL enhances performance by reducing prompt ambiguity and facilitating posterior concentration on the intended task. Furthermore, we find that CoT prompting activates the model's capacity for task decomposition, breaking complex problems into a sequence of simpler sub-tasks that the model has mastered during the pretraining phase. By comparing their individual error bounds, we provide novel theoretical insights into the statistical superiority of advanced prompt engineering techniques.

Chain-of-thought (CoT) prompting is widely used as a reasoning aid and is often treated as a transparency mechanism. Yet behavioral gains under CoT do not imply that the model's internal computation causally depends on the emitted reasoning text, i.e. models may produce fluent rationales while routing decision-critical computation through latent pathways. We introduce a causal, layerwise audit of CoT faithfulness based on activation patching. Our key metric, the CoT Mediation Index (CMI), isolates CoT-specific causal influence by comparing performance degradation from patching CoT-token hidden states against matched control patches. Across multiple model families (Phi, Qwen, DialoGPT) and scales, we find that CoT-specific influence is typically depth-localized into narrow ''reasoning windows,'' and we identify bypass regimes where CMI is near-zero despite plausible CoT text. We further observe that models tuned explicitly for reasoning tend to exhibit stronger and more structured mediation than larger untuned counterparts, while Mixture-of-Experts models show more distributed mediation consistent with routing-based computation. Overall, our results show that CoT faithfulness varies substantially across models and tasks and cannot be inferred from behavior alone, motivating causal, layerwise audits when using CoT as a transparency signal.

Chain-of-Thought (CoT) empowers Large Language Models (LLMs) to tackle complex problems, but remains constrained by the computational cost and early token commitments in discrete reasoning traces. Recent latent reasoning approaches attempt to optimize efficiency by performing reasoning within continuous hidden states. However, many such methods optimize latent states end to end without a trained interface for intermediate textual readout, and several representative configurations use a pre-defined number of latent steps during inference. In this work, we introduce PLaT (Planning with Latent Thoughts), a framework that decouples latent planning from verbalization. The Planner deterministically evolves latent planning states, while an independent Decoder provides textual readouts when needed. Answer-aware textual stopping allows the latent rollout to use a problem-dependent number of groups rather than a pre-specified chain length. PLaT achieves competitive coverage at larger $k$ in several mathematical settings, with lower Pass@1: on Llama-1B GSM8K, it reaches 80.59% Pass@128 versus CODI's 72.37%. These results support PLaT as a candidate-generation interface supplying multiple textual readouts for downstream verification or reranking.

Large language models often externalize reasoning as linear chains, but many reasoning problems can be more naturally modeled as directed acyclic graphs (DAGs), where intermediate conclusions branch, merge, and are reused. Whether such graph structure is reflected in model internals remains unclear. We introduce Reasoning DAG Probing to answer this question. We formalize each premise, intermediate conclusion, and final answer as a DAG node, and train lightweight probes to predict node depth, pairwise distance, and adjacency from LLM hidden states. Across logical, mathematical, and code reasoning benchmarks, we find that DAG structure is meaningfully encoded in LLM representations: it peaks in intermediate layers, with later layers preferentially recover deeper nodes and longer-range reasoning dependencies, and becomes stronger with model scale. DAG structure also progressively emerges during autoregressive generation in ways that anticipate answer correctness, while steering activations toward the ground-truth DAG structure can convert some originally incorrect generations into correct ones. These results suggest that LLM reasoning is not purely sequential, but reflects measurable latent graph structure.

Latent tokens are gaining attention for enhancing reasoning in large language models (LLMs), yet their internal mechanisms remain unclear. This paper examines the problem from a reliability perspective, uncovering fundamental weaknesses: latent tokens function as uninterpretable placeholders rather than encoding faithful reasoning. While resistant to perturbation, they promote shortcut usage over genuine reasoning. We focus on Chain-of-Continuous-Thought (COCONUT), which claims better efficiency and stability than explicit Chain-of-Thought (CoT) while maintaining performance. We investigate this through two complementary approaches. First, steering experiments perturb specific token subsets, namely COCONUT and explicit CoT. Unlike CoT tokens, COCONUT tokens show minimal sensitivity to steering and lack reasoning-critical information. Second, shortcut experiments evaluate models under biased and out-of-distribution settings. Results on MMLU and HotpotQA demonstrate that COCONUT consistently exploits dataset artifacts, inflating benchmark performance without true reasoning. These findings reposition COCONUT as a pseudo-reasoning mechanism: it generates plausible traces that conceal shortcut dependence rather than faithfully representing reasoning processes.

Modern LLMs are trained to "think" primarily via explicit text generation, such as chain-of-thought (CoT), which defers reasoning to post-training and under-leverages pre-training data. We present and open-source Ouro, named after the recursive Ouroboros, a family of pre-trained Looped Language Models (LoopLM) that instead build reasoning into the pre-training phase through (i) iterative computation in latent space, (ii) an entropy-regularized objective for learned depth allocation, and (iii) scaling to 7.7T tokens. Ouro 1.4B and 2.6B models enjoy superior performance that match the results of up to 12B SOTA LLMs across a wide range of benchmarks. Through controlled experiments, we show this advantage stems not from increased knowledge capacity, but from superior knowledge manipulation capabilities. We also show that LoopLM yields reasoning traces more aligned with final outputs than explicit CoT. We hope our results show the potential of LoopLM as a novel scaling direction in the reasoning era. Our model is available here: http://ouro-llm.github.io.

Recent language models exhibit significant logical reasoning abilities, yet the mechanisms supporting deductive inference remain poorly understood. This paper studies small transformer-based language models trained from scratch on multi-step deductive tasks, focusing on the distinction between horizontal reasoning, where intermediate steps are generated autoregressively, and vertical reasoning, where inference unfolds implicitly across layers before the first output token is produced. We analyze two synthetic tasks: logical consequence over chains of symbolic implications and root-to-leaf navigation in binary trees. Mechanistic interpretability reveals that Chain-of-Thought supervision enables models to learn rule-based inference rather than statistical shortcuts. In the horizontal setting, a shallow attention-only model develops interpretable circuits for rule completion, rule chaining, and final decision making, largely implemented through induction-head-like mechanisms. We further introduce a truncated pseudoinverse method to decode the information carried by queries, keys, and values. For vertical reasoning, Chain-of-Thought appears to act less as explicit step-by-step guidance and more as a form of curriculum learning, helping the model acquire increasingly complex reasoning patterns. Without Chain-of-Thought, models tend to memorize or exploit dataset biases. These results provide a low-level account of how transformers can implement deductive reasoning and suggest how Chain-of-Thought may serve different functions in horizontal and vertical reasoning.