Skip to content

PoTRE: Test-Time Reasoning inspired by Cognitive Heterogeneity

Jul 2026 · Trans. Mach. Learn. Res. · Vol 2026 · 0 citations
Computer Science

TL;DR

PoTRE (Poly-Topological Reasoning Ensembles), a heterogeneous framework that decouples inference into four agents that achieves improved reasoning performance using similar or fewer inference tokens compared to heavily scaled homogeneous baselines is introduced.

Abstract

While Large Language Models (LLMs) excel at many tasks, they frequently struggle with complex reasoning that requires long-horizon planning and iterative error correction. Furthermore, standard single-stream prompting proves brittle when models encounter novel abstractions or rigorous domain constraints. We introduce PoTRE (Poly-Topological Reasoning Ensembles), a heterogeneous framework that decouples inference into four agents: (1) Adversarial Refinement Agent, (2) Hierarchical strategic Planning Agent, (3) Spectrum Search Agent, and (4) Direct Chain Agent. A final Task-Adaptive Aggregation Layer dynamically reconciles these perspectives -- via final candidate selection, semantic synthesis, or neuro-symbolic verification -- to produce a robust global solution. We evaluate PoTRE on three frontier benchmarks: ARC-AGI-2, Humanity's Last Exam (HLE), and PRBench Finance. PoTRE achieves state-of-the-art accuracy of 49.92% on HLE, surpassing the previous best official score. We demonstrate that this architectural heterogeneity achieves improved reasoning performance using similar or fewer inference tokens compared to heavily scaled homogeneous baselines.

View source

Similar papers

Preprint Jul 2026

Cost-Effective Agent Harnesses for Abstract Reasoning and Generalization on ARC-AGI-1

This work introduces an Explorer-Definer Pipeline that separates pattern discovery from executable transformation synthesis, implemented as a two-stage agent pipeline, and presents the Reflective Orchestrator, which augments the pipeline with autonomous exploration of new transformations when previous hypotheses fail o...

Kabir Moghe, Peter Chin · 0 citations
Preprint Aug 2026

Recursive Agentic Reasoning

Analysis shows that BRANCH's advantage arises not only from exploring multiple reasoning paths, but also from recovering from truncation: its gains strongly correlate with the baseline rate of empty, budget-exhausted outputs, weakening the hypothesis that different problems require routing among test-time reasoning ope...

Sheng Zhang, Xiao-Min Wu, Xi-Yang Wu et al. · 0 citations

Dissecting Reinforcement Learning: Mechanisms Behind Compositional Reasoning in LLMs

This thesis proposes a unified two-axis framework that organizes SFT and RL methods along a data axis (off-policy to on-policy) and a loss function axis (positive-only to positive-plus-negative to GRPO) and enables controlled ablations of individual components.

G. Kim, Chair Chenyan Xiong, Aditi Raghunathan · 0 citations
Conference Open access Sep 2026

A Review on Test-Time Scaling for Agentic Large Language Models

A novel RAIE taxonomy along four scaling dimensions is proposed, which optimizes the entire thought process through search algorithms and self-verification, and introduces a task-oriented guideline for choosing the best TTS strategy.

Jia-Yu An, Zheng Chen, Yong-Cheng Jing et al. · 0 citations
Preprint Aug 2026

Cognitive Demand Steering for Adaptive Meta-Reasoning in Large Language Models

CDS is introduced, a training-free meta-reasoning framework equipped with residual demand assessment: at each step, an LLM-based progress evaluator characterizes the residual reasoning required to arrive at a solution rather than merely evaluating the previous step.

John Scoville, Shengzhuang Chen, Yejin Bang et al. · 0 citations
Preprint Aug 2026

Reason Wide, Not Deep: Amortizing the Reasoning Premium into Distilled Skills

This work shows that reasoning traces are not a prerequisite: skills distilled from non-reasoning trajectories alone remain competitive with skills distilled from paired reasoning/non-reasoning corpora, with domain-dependent differences between the two sources.

Agamdeep Singh, Srishti Gautam, Priyanshu Gupta et al. · 0 citations

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