Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

Derailer-Rerailer: Adaptive Verification for Efficient and Reliable Language Model Reasoning

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 2408.13940 v4 pith:44T26ZCL submitted 2024-08-25 cs.CL

classification cs.CL
keywords reasoningcomputationalderailer-rerailerframeworkmethodstasksverificationwhile
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown impressive reasoning capabilities, yet existing prompting methods face a critical trade-off: simple approaches often struggle with complex tasks and reasoning stability, while more sophisticated methods require multiple inferences and substantial computational resources, limiting their practical deployment. To address this challenge, we propose Derailer-Rerailer, a novel framework that adaptively balances reasoning accuracy and computational efficiency. At its core, our framework employs a lightweight Derailer mechanism to assess reasoning stability and selectively triggers an advanced Rerailer verification process only when necessary, thereby optimizing computational resource usage. Extensive evaluation across both open and closed-source models on more than 20 categories of mathematical, symbolic, and commonsense reasoning tasks demonstrates our framework's effectiveness: Derailer-Rerailer achieves significant accuracy improvements (8-11\% across various reasoning tasks) while maintaining 2-3 times better efficiency than existing verification methods, with particularly strong performance in mathematical and symbolic reasoning, offering a practical solution for enhancing LLM reasoning reliability while significantly reducing computational overhead.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. LETToT: Label-Free Evaluation of Large Language Models On Tourism Using Expert Tree-of-Thought

    cs.CL 2025-08 reject novelty 5.0 of 10

    LETToT scores LLM tourism answers by counting coverage of expert-designed reasoning elements, and finds reasoning-enhanced small models beat larger non-reasoning models on that rubric.

  2. Evaluation Hallucination in Multi-Round Incomplete Information Lateral-Driven Reasoning Tasks

    cs.CL 2025-05 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    LLM-as-judge scoring of multi-round lateral thinking tasks can be fooled by answer leakage and question substitution, so response-based metrics may overstate reasoning ability.

Pith tools