Structured CoT Reasoning
CoT: Chain-of-Thought
Latest papers
15 papers1 paper in the last four weeks, with none the four weeks before. 0.0% of all new papers.
Recent studies show that artificial intelligence (AI) with language and vision capabilities still experiences limitations in spatial reasoning. In this paper, we have studied the spatial capabilities of advanced generative AI to understand the rotations of objects in 3D space, utilizing AI's image processing and language processing features. We trained and examined the spatial intelligence of a generative Agentic AI model (GPT-5.6) to understand the spatial rotation process with rotation diagrams based on the revised Purdue Spatial Visualization Test: Visualization of Rotations (Revised PSVT:R). We improvised the Revised PSVT:R by superimposing additional graphical and contextual features to evaluate how different Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning strategies influence model performance. The results indicate that structured CoT reasoning improves the spatial reasoning performance of the base GPT-5.6 model in both datasets (PSVT:R and PSVT:R with coordinate system). We used three CoT approaches - (1) Structured CoT, (2) few-shot Structured CoT, and Structured CoT with Self-optimized Prompt. The three CoT approaches evaluated in this study showed no significant performance difference. Results showed that combining structured CoT reasoning with relevant contextual information leads to considerable improvements in VLM performance on 3D rotation tasks, demonstrating the potential of agentic AI for more effective spatial reasoning. However, when contextual information is removed, structured CoT reasoning alone provides limited improvement, and the models continue to exhibit notable difficulties in understanding spatial transformations. These findings suggest that effective spatial reasoning in VLMs relies on the integration of visual, textual, and reasoning-based information in future agentic AI systems for spatial intelligence.
Towards Physics-Faithful Generation of Scientific Diagrams
Text-to-image generation has reached photorealistic quality, yet state-of-the-art systems remain unreliable at producing scientific diagrams, whose value depends not on appearance but on physical faithfulness: correct force directions, valid coordinate systems, consistent thermodynamic states, and equations matching the depicted scenario. Trained on web imagery with physically shallow captions, generic models produce diagrams that look plausible but are physically wrong, harmful in education and scientific communication. We present Princigram, a physics-faithful scientific-diagram generator, and its data pipeline. Our central advance is Structured Physical Chain-of-Thought (SP-CoT): a per-subdiscipline schema that decomposes a physics diagram into an explicit multi-step reasoning chain across six subdisciplines, from scene identification through force or process analysis to governing laws and synthesis. Unlike free-form chain-of-thought, SP-CoT follows a fixed schema with strict fidelity rules that separate visually grounded facts from physically inferred reasoning and type all mathematics symbolically; it serves both as dense training supervision and, at inference, as a structured "thinking" prompt. With it we curate and structurally annotate 4.3 million physics images, of which 115,037 carry expert-level annotation, and adapt a unified multimodal backbone. We further introduce VeriphyT2IBench, whose questions are derived from each held-out diagram's own structured annotation: each diagram becomes an item-specific bank of binary questions about its objects, forces, and states, so a judge model's score decomposes into named physical facts rather than one holistic number. On the physics subset of GenExam and on VeriphyT2IBench, Princigram shows that explicit physics-structured supervision improves the physical faithfulness of generated scientific diagrams.
Reasoning Consensus: Structural Ensembling of LLM Reasoning via Weighted DAG Aggregation
Large Language Models (LLMs) explore problems through chain-of-thought, but this exploration is buried in unstructured prose. On high-stakes tasks, users cannot tell which steps are well-supported, which alternatives were seriously considered, or how the final conclusion compares to those the model discarded. We propose a framework that ensembles the reasoning structure, not just the answers, of multiple LLMs by weighted merging of Directed Acyclic Graphs (DAGs) extracted from reasoning chains. We weight each step by how many traces independently attest to it, to return "Consensus Reasoning". Across six benchmarks spanning statutory interpretation, graduate-level science, narrative multi-hop reasoning, and first-order logic, our ensemble outperforms a matched-budget majority-vote baseline, with a maximum accuracy gain of 3.1% on MuSR-MM (narrative multi-hop reasoning). On a single model, the framework matches or exceeds self-consistency at the same trace budget while additionally exposing an inspectable consensus reasoning graph. Ensemble weights correlate with LLM-judge rankings of reasoning quality at Spearman -, and consensus subgraphs are preferred over alternatives leading to the majority-vote answer in 54.4-65.4% of head-to-head comparisons across five of six datasets. We observe that our framework can also be used to analyze diverse reasoning perspectives for a problem.
Cognitive Dual-Process Planning for Autonomous Driving with Structured Scene Knowledge and Verifiable Reasoning-Action Consistency
High-level planning for autonomous driving is a knowledge-intensive engineering decision task that requires accurate scene understanding, timely inference, and internally consistent action selection. Vision-language models (VLMs) can make intermediate reasoning explicit, but their use in deployed planners is constrained by costly structured supervision, unnecessary reasoning in routine scenes, and possible inconsistencies between generated rationales and driving actions. We present a cognitive dual-process planning framework that represents planning-relevant scene knowledge in a machine-parsable structured chain-of-thought (S-CoT) schema. An automated data engine integrates perception foundation models, critical-path filtering, and an expert VLM to generate S-CoT supervision without manual annotation of individual rationales. A lightweight visual Arbiter estimates scene complexity from multilevel vision-encoder features before language decoding and routes each input to either fast meta-action prediction or slow structured reasoning. For slow-path outputs, a deterministic rule-based validator checks whether the parsed S-CoT fields are consistent with the final meta-action and provides verifiable rewards for Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO). In a 195-scene manual audit, the generated annotations achieve 91.8% CoT accuracy and a 98.5% Logical Consistency Score (LCS). On 574 manually verified NAVSIM test samples, the planner achieves 80.14% planning accuracy and 97.20% LCS while reducing average latency by 17.39% relative to applying slow reasoning to every scene. Evaluation on external long-tail subsets further identifies conditions under which routing and planning performance degrade. Together, these results show how explicit scene knowledge can be operationalized through adaptive reasoning and rule-based verification to support high-level VLM planning decisions.
Structured Thoughts For Improved Reasoning And Context Pruning
Large language models (LLMs) excel at generating long chains of thought, but long reasoning traces are often verbose and memory-inefficient. In this work, we introduce Structured Thoughts, a framework that organizes reasoning into alternating <try> and <outcome> blocks: <try> captures exploratory scratch work, while <outcome> contains the distilled conclusion of that step. We construct a dataset of structured thoughts by segmenting reasoning traces into <try> blocks and prompting an LLM to summarize each step into its corresponding <outcome>. Fine-tuning pretrained foundation models on this reformatted data produces models that adopt the structured reasoning style, leading to performance gains of up to 8.08% on reasoning benchmarks compared to standard SFT. The explicit structure also enables context pruning: after each <try>/<outcome> pair, the <try> can be pruned, allowing the model to retain conclusions without keeping the full scratch work in the context. A proof-of-concept pruning implementation achieves an average of 85% memory / context savings with an 8.67% performance drop across mathematical tasks.
Imbuing Large Language Models with Bidirectional Logic for Robust Chain Repair
Autoregressive chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning in large language models (LLMs) is fundamentally forward-directed: each step conditions only on prior tokens. This unidirectional inductive bias renders even capable models susceptible to error snowballing, wherein a single logical or arithmetic mistake in an early step irreversibly corrupts the entire reasoning chain. We introduce Teleological Reasoning Infilling (\TRI{}), a training framework that endows decoder-only transformers with a native goal-conditioned bridging capability. The key insight is to reframe erroneous reasoning segments as fill-in-the-middle (FIM) tasks: given a verified prefix premise , a verified downstream milestone , and the original query , the model must synthesise the logical bridge that connects to rigorously and completely. To achieve this with standard causal architectures, we introduce a Prefix-Suffix-Middle (PSM) sequence rearrangement with three non-overlapping sentinel tokens, enabling to attend to both and without any structural modification to the self-attention mechanism. Training proceeds in two stages: (i) Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT) on symbolically verified triples extracted from formal mathematics corpora, and (ii) Direct Preference Optimisation (DPO) with a deterministic symbolic verifier (Lean 4 / Python) as the sole reward oracle, eliminating LLM-judge sycophancy. At inference, TRI operates as a surgical repair module within a dual-system loop: a causal draft model generates an initial trace, the verifier pinpoints failures, and TRI infills only the damaged segment, leaving verified sections intact. Comprehensive experiments on three benchmarks demonstrate that TRI achieves state-of-the-art performance across all tasks, while reducing per-problem token expenditure by 31.2%.
ReasonOps: Operator Segmentation for LLM Reasoning Traces
Chain-of-thought traces from large reasoning models can span tens of thousands of tokens, yet we lack a vocabulary for describing their internal structure. Previous methods developed to analyze chain-of-thought traces are either too rigid or not expressive enough, failing to capture features across domains and models. To remedy this, we develop ReasonOps, an unsupervised, expressive method for annotating chain-of-thought traces, providing succinct universal operators. Using ReasonOps, we analyze 44,662 traces from 12 thinking LLMs spanning 6 families across 8 reasoning benchmarks and discover that they share a common compositional structure: 7 recurring reasoning operators -- discourse-level moves such as backtracking, inferring, and hypothesizing -- that emerge from unsupervised clustering of sentence-initial 3-token pivots. These operators appear across every model family and benchmark domain, confirmed by three independent LLM judges who classify held-out samples at 70 -76% accuracy. We analyze the structure of operators on easy vs. hard problems, revealing that reflective operators are more helpful on hard problems and harm performance on easy problems. Operator sequences are highly model-identifying: a classifier trained on operator distributions alone recovers the source model with macro-AUC, revealing that each model family has a distinctive reasoning fingerprint. Structural operator features predict within-problem answer correctness well above baselines. Classifiers built on these operators reach WP-AUC and on AIME specifically. ReasonOps further enables early quality estimation well before the trace completes: we predict at WP-AUC for only 50% of the trace. The ReasonOps pipeline is unsupervised and annotation-free, enabling deep insights into LLM reasoning traces as well as strong downstream results on model identification and correctness prediction.
Correct Prediction, Wrong Steps? Consensus Reasoning Knowledge Graph for Robust Chain-of-Thought Synthesis
Large language models (LLMs) have become increasingly used for various tasks, often coupled with Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting to boost accuracy. Recent work has shown that high label-prediction accuracy does not guarantee correct intermediate reasoning, and the causes of reasoning flaws vary from sample to sample, yet existing remedies either focus on a single domain or assume that one flaw type applies uniformly across samples. A simple mitigation method is to provide the model with the correct answer, but we show that this yields no consistent improvement in reasoning quality. This indicates that the problem cannot be fixed by LLMs' awareness of answers, and must instead be addressed through the structure of reasoning. Motivated by this, we propose CRAFT (Consensus Reasoning knowledge graph Aggregation for Flaw-aware Trace synthesis), which aggregates the consensus components shared across multiple candidate reasoning traces to synthesize improved ones. CRAFT consistently improves label-prediction accuracy on both logical and mathematical reasoning benchmarks, outperforming most baselines, while its post-processed traces achieve higher quality under fine-grained benchmark evaluation.
How does Chain of Thought decompose complex tasks?
Many language tasks can be modeled as classification problems where a large language model (LLM) is given a prompt and selects one among many possible answers. We show that the classification error in such problems scales as a power law in the number of classes. This has a dramatic consequence: the prediction error can be reduced substantially by splitting the overall task into a sequence of smaller classification problems, each with the same number of classes ("degree"). This tree-structured decomposition models chain-of-thought (CoT). It has been observed that CoT-based predictors perform better when they "think", i.e., when they develop a deeper tree, thus decomposing the problem into a larger number of steps. We identify a critical threshold for the degree, below which thinking is detrimental, and above which there exists an optimal depth that minimizes the error. It is impossible to surpass this minimal error by increasing the depth of thinking.
Cognitive Loop of Thought: Reversible Hierarchical Markov Chain for Efficient Mathematical Reasoning
Multi-step Chain-of-Thought (CoT) has significantly advanced the mathematical reasoning capabilities of LLMs by leveraging explicit reasoning steps. However, the widespread adoption of Long CoT often results in sequence lengths that exceed manageable computational limits. While existing approaches attempt to alleviate this by reducing KV Cache redundancy via Markov chain-like structures, they introduce two critical limitations: inherent memorylessness (loss of context) and limited backward reasoning capability. To address these limitations, we propose a novel Chain-of-Thought framework based on Reversible Hierarchical Markov Chain, termed Cognitive Loop of Thought (CLoT), and a backward reasoning dataset CLoT-Instruct. In CLoT, problems are decomposed into sub-problems with hierarchical dependencies. Inspired by human cognitive processes, we introduce a backward verification mechanism at each hierarchical layer. Furthermore, we implement a pruning strategy: once higher-level sub-problems are verified, redundant lower-level sub-problems are pruned to maximize efficiency. This approach effectively mitigates error propagation and enhances reasoning robustness. Experiments on four mathematical benchmarks demonstrate the effectiveness of our method. Notably, on the AddSub dataset using GPT-4o-mini, CLoT achieves 99.0% accuracy, outperforming traditional CoT and CoT-SC by 4.1% and 2.9%, respectively.
Reinforcing Structured Chain-of-Thought for Video Understanding
Multi-modal Large Language Models (MLLMs) show promise in video understanding. However, their reasoning often suffers from thinking drift and weak temporal comprehension, even when enhanced by Reinforcement Learning (RL) techniques like Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO). Moreover, existing RL methods usually depend on Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT), which requires costly Chain-of-Thought (CoT) annotation and multi-stage training, and enforces fixed reasoning paths, limiting MLLMs' ability to generalize and potentially inducing bias. To overcome these limitations, we introduce Summary-Driven Reinforcement Learning (SDRL), a novel single-stage RL framework that obviates the need for SFT by utilizing a Structured CoT format: Summarize -> Think -> Answer. SDRL introduces two self-supervised mechanisms integrated into the GRPO objective: 1) Consistency of Vision Knowledge (CVK) enforces factual grounding by reducing KL divergence among generated summaries; and 2) Dynamic Variety of Reasoning (DVR) promotes exploration by dynamically modulating thinking diversity based on group accuracy. This novel integration effectively balances alignment and exploration, supervising both the final answer and the reasoning process. Our method achieves state-of-the-art performance on seven public VideoQA datasets.
Correct Chains, Wrong Answers: Dissociating Reasoning from Output in LLM Logic
LLMs can execute every step of chain-of-thought reasoning correctly and still produce wrong final answers. We introduce the Novel Operator Test, a benchmark that separates operator logic from operator name, enabling rigorous distinction between genuine reasoning and pattern retrieval. By evaluating Boolean operators under unfamiliar names across depths 1-10 on five models (up to 8,100 problems each), we demonstrate a reasoning-output dissociation that existing benchmarks cannot detect. At Claude Sonnet 4's depth 7, all 31 errors have verifiably correct reasoning yet wrong declared answers; 17/19 errors in mixed-operator chains exhibit the same pattern. The benchmark reveals two failure types: strategy failures at depth 2, where models attempt terse retrieval (+62pp from scaffolding), and content failures at depth 7, where models reason fully but err systematically (+8-30pp, 0/300 errors post-intervention). A Trojan operator (XOR's truth table under a novel name) confirms name alone does not gate reasoning (p >= 0.49), while Llama's novelty gap widens to 28pp at depth 8-9 with the Trojan at 92-100%, isolating genuine difficulty with novel logic from name unfamiliarity.
The Reasoning Bottleneck in Graph-RAG: Structured Prompting and Context Compression for Multi-Hop QA
Graph-RAG systems achieve strong multi-hop question answering by indexing documents into knowledge graphs, but strong retrieval does not guarantee strong answers. Evaluating KET-RAG, a leading Graph-RAG system, on three multi-hop QA benchmarks (HotpotQA, MuSiQue, 2WikiMultiHopQA), we find that 77% to 91% of questions have the gold answer in the retrieved context, yet accuracy is only 35% to 78%, and 73% to 84% of errors are reasoning failures. We propose two augmentations: (i) SPARQL chain-of-thought prompting, which decomposes questions into triple-pattern queries aligned with the entity-relationship context, and (ii) graph-walk compression, which compresses the context by ~60% via knowledge-graph traversal with no LLM calls. SPARQL CoT improves accuracy by +2 to +14 pp; graph-walk compression adds +6 pp on average when paired with structured prompting on smaller models. Surprisingly, we show that, with question-type routing, a fully augmented budget open-weight Llama-8B model matches or exceeds the unaugmented Llama-70B baseline on all three benchmarks at ~12x lower cost. A replication on LightRAG confirms that our augmentations transfer across Graph-RAG systems.
CORE-Acu: Structured Reasoning Traces and Knowledge Graph Safety Verification for Acupuncture Clinical Decision Support
Large language models (LLMs) show significant potential for clinical decision support (CDS), yet their black-box nature -- characterized by untraceable reasoning and probabilistic hallucinations -- poses severe challenges in acupuncture, a field demanding rigorous interpretability and safety. To address this, we propose CORE-Acu, a neuro-symbolic framework for acupuncture clinical decision support that integrates Structured Chain-of-Thought (S-CoT) with knowledge graph (KG) safety verification. First, we construct the first acupuncture Structured Reasoning Trace dataset and a schema-constrained fine-tuning framework. By enforcing an explicit causal chain from pattern identification to treatment principles, treatment plans, and acupoint selection, we transform implicit Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) reasoning into interpretable generation constraints, mitigating the opacity of LLM-based CDS. Furthermore, we construct a TCM safety knowledge graph and establish a ``Generate--Verify--Revise'' closed-loop inference system based on a Symbolic Veto Mechanism, employing deterministic rules to intercept hallucinations and enforce hard safety boundaries. Finally, we introduce the Lexicon-Matched Entity-Reweighted Loss (LMERL), which corrects terminology drift caused by the frequency--importance mismatch in general optimization by adaptively amplifying gradient contributions of high-risk entities during fine-tuning. Experiments on 1,000 held-out cases demonstrate CORE-Acu's superior entity fidelity and reasoning quality. Crucially, CORE-Acu achieved 0/1,000 observed safety violations (95% CI: 0--0.37%), whereas GPT-4o exhibited an 8.5% violation rate under identical rules. These results establish CORE-Acu as a robust neuro-symbolic framework for acupuncture clinical decision support, guaranteeing both reasoning auditability and strict safety compliance.
Explore-Execute Chain: Towards an Efficient Structured Reasoning Paradigm
Many LLMs plan before they act, yet planning and execution are often still entangled in one long generation trace, enforced only through prompts, or split across separate components. We argue that these two stages call for different computation: planning benefits from diversity and breadth, whereas execution demands precision and faithful adherence to a chosen strategy. Treating them as a single undifferentiated chain wastes tokens on routine derivation and makes it costly to explore alternative strategies at test time. We present the Explore-Execute Chain (E\textsuperscript{2}C), which keeps both stages in one model but separates them structurally: a stochastic Exploration phase drafts a concise high-level plan, and a deterministic Execution phase carries it out. Causal SFT and RL train this split so that exploration stays informative and execution remains plan-faithful. Once plans are short yet decisive, extra inference compute can be directed to exploration rather than to repeatedly decoding full solutions. On AIME'2024 at , E\textsuperscript{2}C-ReAct Loop reaches 53.3% accuracy with only 12.4k tokens, outperforming Tree-of-Thoughts (: 50.0%, 71.3k). The same structure also supports lightweight domain adaptation: Exploration-Focused SFT (EF-SFT) updates only the planning phase, uses 3.5% of the tokens required by standard SFT, and improves medical benchmark accuracy by up to 14.5%.