This work presents two converging lines of evidence that linear probes trained on layer-wise hidden states reveal that RL models tend to achieve higher accuracy in predicting answer correctness compared to SFT models, indicating more linearly separable and structured representations.
Abstract
Large reasoning models trained via reinforcement learning (RL) have been increasingly shown to outperform their supervised fine-tuned (SFT) counterparts on mathematical reasoning tasks; Yet the mechanistic basis for this advantage remains unclear. We therefore ask, what internal representational differences enable RL models'superior performance? Our work presents two converging lines of evidence: First, linear probes trained on layer-wise hidden states reveal that RL models tend to achieve higher accuracy in predicting answer correctness compared to SFT models, indicating more linearly separable and structured representations. Second, mean ablation studies show that RL models develop a hierarchical architecture where deeper layers become progressively more critical, whereas SFT models distribute importance uniformly across layers. Together, these findings demonstrate that RL training fundamentally restructures how models represent and process reasoning problems. Finally, we analyze token-count variability under repeated sampling across problems to assess adaptive compute allocation. While we observe higher variability in some RL-tuned models than in their SFT counterparts, we see strong consistency in others, suggesting that token allocation may depend more on the overall training pipeline than on RL versus SFT alone. We believe this token-allocation variability reveals the spread of plausible on-policy reasoning, highlighting which models exhibit stable policies versus those that are under-determined, potentially non-identifiable solution behaviour.
The nature of test-time exploration in RLVR-trained LLMs is investigated by employing controlled maze-solving experiments and extracting a tree structure from mathematical reasoning traces (BODHI-Trees) based on semantic equivalence to delineate between entropy arising from stylistic variations and genuine inferential branching.
Soumadeep Saha, Krish Sharma, Akshay Chaturvedi et al.· 1 citation
Reasoning-oriented large language models often achieve strong problem-solving performance by generating long chains of thought, but this behavior substantially increases inference cost and latency. In contrast, instruction-tuned models tend to answer more concisely, yet often lack comparable reasoning ability. This accuracy-efficiency mismatch motivates a lightweight approach that combines the strengths of both models without full model retraining. In this paper, we propose GRIP (Granular Reward-guided Interpolation of Parameters), a reward-guided parameter interpolation framework for efficient reasoning. Given a reasoning model and an instruction model with identical architectures, GRIP assigns learnable interpolation ratios to individual modules and optimizes only these ratios while keeping both source models frozen. The interpolation ratios are trained with a reward signal that favors responses that are both correct and concise. Experiments show that GRIP achieves a better accuracy-efficiency trade-off than fixed or search-based merging baselines and further reveals module-wise fusion patterns associated with efficient reasoning.
This work demonstrates a concrete failure mode where frontier models exhibit invisible reasoning by leveraging semantically irrelevant filler tokens to improve performance on synthetic reasoning tasks and indicates that frontier models already perform consequential computation with no interpretable trace in their output tokens.
Vatsal Baherwani, Tom Goldstein, Ashwinee Panda· arXiv.org· 4 citations· ⚡2
Large language models (LLMs) have recently shown strong performance on Theory of Mind (ToM) tests, prompting debate about the nature and validity of the underlying capabilities. At the same time, reasoning-oriented LLMs trained via reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards have demonstrated notable improvements across a range of benchmarks. In this work, we examine the behavior of such reasoning models in ToM tasks using novel adaptations of machine psychological experiments together with results from established benchmarks. We observe that reasoning models consistently exhibit increased robustness to prompt variations and task perturbations. Our analysis suggests these gains come at least partly from models being more robust at reaching the correct answer under prompt and task variation. We read this as evidence for a robustness-based account rather than for a new ToM-specific ability.
I. D. Haan, P. V. Putten, M. V. Duijn· 0 citations
A controlled study isolates the source of MADA-RL's gains: the counterfactual advantage produces the highest critic improvement rate of any model evaluated, indicating that trained critics learn to correct generator errors rather than to imitate them.
Martino M. L. Pulici, Cuong Xuan Chu, Evgeny Kharlamov et al.· arXiv.org· 0 citations
This work presents a stable and efficient training pipeline, incorporating algorithmic and system optimizations such as clipped importance sampling, training-inference ratio correction, and mixed-precision control, and proposes a structured evaluation framework across three dimensions: comprehensibility, reproducibility, and efficiency.
Xinyu Tang, Gangqiang Cao, Yurou Liu et al.· arXiv.org· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.
