Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 cited by

Can Language Models Learn to Skip Steps?

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2411.01855 v1 pith:SSGOEQVP submitted 2024-11-04 cs.CL

Can Language Models Learn to Skip Steps?

classification cs.CL
keywords modelsreasoningstepsabilitylanguageskipabilitiescognitive
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

Trained on vast corpora of human language, language models demonstrate emergent human-like reasoning abilities. Yet they are still far from true intelligence, which opens up intriguing opportunities to explore the parallels of humans and model behaviors. In this work, we study the ability to skip steps in reasoning - a hallmark of human expertise developed through practice. Unlike humans, who may skip steps to enhance efficiency or to reduce cognitive load, models do not inherently possess such motivations to minimize reasoning steps. To address this, we introduce a controlled framework that stimulates step-skipping behavior by iteratively refining models to generate shorter and accurate reasoning paths. Empirical results indicate that models can develop the step skipping ability under our guidance. Moreover, after fine-tuning on expanded datasets that include both complete and skipped reasoning sequences, the models can not only resolve tasks with increased efficiency without sacrificing accuracy, but also exhibit comparable and even enhanced generalization capabilities in out-of-domain scenarios. Our work presents the first exploration into human-like step-skipping ability and provides fresh perspectives on how such cognitive abilities can benefit AI models.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Post Reasoning: Improving the Performance of Non-Thinking Models at No Cost

    cs.AI 2026-05 conditional novelty 7.0

    Post-Reasoning boosts LLM accuracy by reversing the usual answer-after-reasoning order, delivering mean relative gains of 17.37% across 117 model-benchmark pairs with zero extra cost.

  2. Neural Chain-of-Thought Search: Searching the Optimal Reasoning Path to Enhance Large Language Models

    cs.CL 2026-01 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    NCoTS treats chain-of-thought reasoning as a search problem and uses a dual-factor heuristic to find paths that are over 3.5% more accurate and 22% shorter on benchmarks.

  3. Thinking Economically: A Hierarchical Framework for Adaptive-Complexity Reasoning in LLMs

    cs.CL 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    HAB applies coarse-to-fine budgeting to LLM reasoning, predicting per-problem depth and learning intra-step token budgets via PPL comparisons and adaptive Pareto optimization, yielding higher accuracy and lower token ...

  4. Stop Overthinking: A Survey on Efficient Reasoning for Large Language Models

    cs.CL 2025-03 accept novelty 5.0

    A survey organizing techniques to achieve efficient reasoning in LLMs by shortening chain-of-thought outputs.