Skip to content
Preprint

Think Deep, Speak Once: Relit, A Recursive Latent Implicit Transformer Framework

Aug 2026 · 0 citations · 24 references
Computer Science

TL;DR

ReLIT (Recursive Latent Implicit Transformer), a hybrid framework that grounds deep recursive reasoning within the rich semantic representations of a foundational model, is introduced, offering a principled framework for semantically grounded implicit reasoning.

Abstract

Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting has become the dominant paradigm for eliciting reasoning in Large Language Models (LLMs), yet it creates substantial computational overhead by forcing models to externalize intermediate reasoning steps as discrete tokens. Recent latent reasoning approaches attempt to internalize this process within continuous hidden states. One of the latest advancements in the field of latent reasoning, Tiny Recursive Models (TRMs) excel at symbolic reasoning but struggle to preserve semantic coherence in natural language settings. To bridge this gap, we introduce ReLIT (Recursive Latent Implicit Transformer), a hybrid framework that grounds deep recursive reasoning within the rich semantic representations of a foundational model. ReLIT augments a frozen LLM backbone (TinyLlama-1.1B) with a lightweight, trainable recursive block that iteratively refines its latent thinking (z) before committing to a final output, structurally solving linguistic intuition from algorithmic processing and enabling"deep thinking"via gradient-isolated recurrent loops without the latency of explicit token generation. Empirically, ReLIT achieves high parameter efficiency on the GLoRE logical reasoning benchmark, matching or outperforming significantly larger models on challenging tasks such as ProofWriter and RuleTaker despite minimal supervision. These results demonstrate that reasoning capability can be scaled efficiently through recurrent depth rather than parameter width, offering a principled framework for semantically grounded implicit reasoning.

View source

Similar papers

#artificial intelligence Preprint Sep 2026

Latent Recurrent Thoughts: Recurrent Refinement of Proposed Latents for Reasoning with Frozen LLMs

Chain-of-thought reasoning unfolds in discrete token space: each step is committed as text, errors propagate, and eliciting good traces presupposes traces to imitate. Reasoning instead in a model's continuous representation space - where intermediate states are vectors rather than words - sidesteps these constraints, but leaves open how those latent states should be computed. We approach this along two axes. First, we keep a large language model (LLM) frozen and use it for what it is already good at - modeling and decoding sequences - while a small auxiliary network supplies continuous latent thoughts as input. Second, we produce those latents by recurrence: a tiny recurrent reasoner refines them over many steps, decoupling the depth of computation from the size of the model, so that the latents are a product of iterative processing rather than a single forward pass. We instantiate this as Latent Recurrent Thoughts (LRT): a task-dedicated proposer supplies base latents, a recurrent reasoner refines them through bounded residual corrections, and the frozen LLM decodes the answer. On symbolic reasoning with answer supervision but no reasoning traces (Countdown-4, Sudoku) and on natural-language reasoning (HumanEval, MBPP, StrategyQA), LRT substantially outperforms prior frozen-decoder continuous-space reasoning methods under an identical decoder, prompt, data, and training budget, and outperforms non-thinking-mode chain-of-thought prompting on the same backbone at a small fraction of its inference compute.

Zhaoxing Chen, Jie Fu · 0 citations
Jul 2026

J-CoT: Chain-of-Thought in J-Space

Under matched backbone and inference settings, J-CoT-Zero matches or exceeds the strongest evaluated latent-reasoning baseline on every benchmark, while J-CoT-Train obtains the highest score across the evaluated mathematical, scientific, coding, and structured path-reasoning tasks.

Jun-De Wu, Jiayuan Zhu, Feng-Lin Liu et al. · 1 citation
Jul 2026

Penelope: Localized Latent Recurrence for Efficient Structured Reasoning

Penelope is introduced, an efficient latent-reasoning framework for pretrained decoder-only Transformers that localizes recurrent computation to a selected decoder interval and attains competitive accuracy relative to established latent-reasoning models while reducing measured inference latency.

Yutong Chen, Shouqian Shi, Xinran Liu et al. · 0 citations
Jul 2026

LatentMT: Machine Translation with Latent Reasoning

LatentMT is introduced, the first systematic study of latent-reasoning LoopLMs for machine translation that adapts a small 2.6B-parameter backbone model with lightweight training and shows that hidden-representation differences shrink along the recurrent reasoning-step axis, supporting the observed saturation in performance.

Wei-Rui Chen, Samar M. Magdy, Chiyu Zhang et al. · 0 citations
Preprint May 2026

MUX: Continuous Reasoning via Multiplexed Tokens

MUX, a simple method for high-bandwidth and compact reasoning based on distillation of discrete reasoning into continuous multiplexed tokens in a latent space, is proposed and suggests that lossless superposition as local learning targets constitutes a sufficient condition for achieving strong and efficient latent continuous reasoning.

Ayhan Suleymanzade, Halil Alperen Gozeten, Michael M. Bronstein et al. · 1 citation
Jul 2026

Think Through a Bottleneck: Hourglass Reasoning for Rigorous Induction

Self-refinement often fails to strengthen few-shot inductive reasoning in large language models. Prompting a model to explicitly state its inferred rule does little on its own. What actually matters is a structurally enforced isolation between reasoning stages, so that information can only pass between them as a compressed symbolic state. We introduce \textbf{Hourglass reasoning}, which enforces strict context isolation between reasoning stages. The frozen LLM acts as a meta-constructor, building for each task a symbolic encoder--decoder: an Induction module compresses the support examples into a schema $\phi$ (encoder) and a transient scaffold $z$; a Deduction module derives rule $T$ (decoder) from these and discards $z$; an Implementer compiles $(\phi, T)$ into artifacts; an error-driven Refiner revises $(\phi, T)$ and regenerates artifacts from scratch. Only $(\phi, T)$ crosses stage boundaries, so all refinement stays anchored to the rule. We evaluate Hourglass across three benchmarks spanning visual abstraction, hardware synthesis, and textual rule induction, using GPT-5.5 and Gemini 3.1 Pro. On ARC-AGI-2, it raises best-of-5 accuracy by up to 14 points over an iterative-refinement baseline. On ChipBench, it nearly doubles Verilog synthesis accuracy with GPT-5.5, from 31\% to 58\%. BBEH-Linguini draws on puzzles from the International Linguistics Olympiad, a setting where prior work has shown that explicit verbalization can hurt performance. Hourglass mitigates this tendency, and on Gemini 3.1 Pro, it reverses the effect entirely. Ablations confirm that these gains come from the isolation between stages and the quality of the initial induction, not from prompt wording or the particular symbolic form used. It is how information flows through the reasoning process, rather than the language used to express it, that drives inductive reasoning in frozen LLMs.

Huan Zhu · 0 citations

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.