{"as_of":"2026-08-10T23:16:00Z","caps":{"database_statements":6,"inbound":100,"outbound":100},"context_digest":"sha256:20d4b09bb55e0e7c327701c264c6bd77fae8d21393a7f477d7aaf07789089bff","coverage":[{"denominator":0,"lane":"reference_resolution","note":"Typed states for the displayed outbound observations.","records_observed":0,"source":"paper_references, paper_reference_links","source_observed_at":null,"state":"measured"},{"denominator":67,"lane":"standing_notices","note":"One-hop event checks from named stored sources.","records_observed":67,"source":"scholarly_work_events, retraction_status_cache","source_observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00","state":"measured"},{"denominator":67,"lane":"inbound_itemization","note":"Pith citing papers itemized under the disclosed page cap.","records_observed":67,"source":"paper_references, paper_reference_links","source_observed_at":"2026-08-10T15:20:56.946510Z","state":"measured"},{"denominator":1,"lane":"external_citation_measurements","note":"A source-named dated measurement, never combined with another source.","records_observed":1,"source":"pith","source_observed_at":"2026-08-05T02:28:24.338817Z","state":"measured"}],"external_citation_measurements":[{"count":0,"observed_at":"2026-08-05T02:28:24.338817Z","source":"pith"}],"inbound":[{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","doi":"10.48550/arxiv.2503.08679","metadata_source":"pith","pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-05T02:28:24.338817Z","title":"Chain-of-thought reasoning in the wild is not always faithful.arXiv preprint:2503.08679","venue":"cs.AI","work_id":"221c289d-ba9c-41b9-a1d6-7ea026fdcc9b","year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2504.21318","last_updated":"2025-04-30T05:05:09Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-08T08:43:53.657438Z","submitted_at":"2025-04-30T05:05:09Z","title":"Phi-4-reasoning Technical Report","version":1},"reference_index":8,"source":"pdf_text","source_observed_at":"2026-05-17T03:40:25.706499Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2504.21318"},"observation_digest":"sha256:332a18b9014953d834d67c934960bb09ce114530c565e3dcdcd6c21c53db5795","observation_id":"9194b23c-8816-44fa-a0e8-38533ac977b9","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-06-01T03:02:49.618587Z","resolver_source":"arxiv_id","status":"verified_exact"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"observation":"No event found in the named queried sources as of 2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00.","reason":null,"source_receipts":[{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00","source":"crossref"},{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:30:57.382061+00:00","source":"retraction_watch"}],"state":"measured"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":null,"doi":null,"metadata_source":null,"pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T05:14:44.340730Z","title":"Arcuschin, J","venue":null,"work_id":null,"year":null},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2506.08446","last_updated":"2025-06-10T04:44:28Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T09:15:20.058485Z","submitted_at":"2025-06-10T04:44:28Z","title":"A Survey on Large Language Models for Mathematical Reasoning","version":1},"reference_index":2017,"source":"pdf_text","source_observed_at":"2026-08-07T05:14:44.340730Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2506.08446"},"observation_digest":"sha256:1971d69b1e19c07682e842074584a95295b582fb76c242f9c2d0ca771c76d30c","observation_id":"65660cc0-fbd5-49e6-a3ff-f2d982edfcc9","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-08-07T05:14:44.340730Z","resolver_source":null,"status":"unresolved"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"reason":"canonical_work_link_unavailable","source_receipts":[],"state":"unavailable"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","doi":"10.48550/arxiv.2503.08679","metadata_source":"pith","pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-05T02:28:24.338817Z","title":"Chain-of-thought reasoning in the wild is not always faithful.arXiv preprint:2503.08679","venue":"cs.AI","work_id":"221c289d-ba9c-41b9-a1d6-7ea026fdcc9b","year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2506.14245","last_updated":"2025-10-02T11:31:47Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-09T05:14:36.079509Z","submitted_at":"2025-06-17T07:06:56Z","title":"Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards Implicitly Incentivizes Correct Reasoning in Base LLMs","version":2},"reference_index":1,"source":"pdf_text","source_observed_at":"2026-05-13T12:44:27.769465Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2506.14245"},"observation_digest":"sha256:5c74515d6e5aff64095868ae6a2ca455135c62ea402ad44bfc0a46b37db77672","observation_id":"7a17aa33-fcff-43ff-a872-6e30272278cc","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-06-01T03:02:49.618587Z","resolver_source":"arxiv_id","status":"metadata_mismatch"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"observation":"No event found in the named queried sources as of 2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00.","reason":null,"source_receipts":[{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00","source":"crossref"},{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:30:57.382061+00:00","source":"retraction_watch"}],"state":"measured"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":null,"doi":null,"metadata_source":null,"pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-06T23:33:52.801644Z","title":null,"venue":null,"work_id":null,"year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2506.17630","last_updated":"2025-06-21T08:15:45Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-08T06:07:41.458492Z","submitted_at":"2025-06-21T08:15:45Z","title":"Answer-Centric or Reasoning-Driven? Uncovering the Latent Memory Anchor in LLMs","version":1},"reference_index":8,"source":"arxiv_source","source_observed_at":"2026-08-06T23:33:52.801644Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2506.17630"},"observation_digest":"sha256:da8b705c20ecca00b0fd4d4e7f0ea134f2ec4dbf653a120f8295a2bbf34022f7","observation_id":"615326e2-1ec1-4e27-996c-c9fcaa96e469","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-08-06T23:33:52.801644Z","resolver_source":null,"status":"unresolved"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"reason":"canonical_work_link_unavailable","source_receipts":[],"state":"unavailable"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":null,"doi":null,"metadata_source":null,"pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-06T23:10:24.498510Z","title":"Chain-of-thought reasoning in the wild is not always faithful, 2025","venue":null,"work_id":null,"year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2506.19492","last_updated":"2025-06-24T10:25:28Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-09T15:14:42.446647Z","submitted_at":"2025-06-24T10:25:28Z","title":"Is Long-to-Short a Free Lunch? Investigating Inconsistency and Reasoning Efficiency in LRMs","version":1},"reference_index":3,"source":"pdf_text","source_observed_at":"2026-08-06T23:10:24.498510Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2506.19492"},"observation_digest":"sha256:dce5db697ac198c23e27f8b0587182941fd3d9ebffcc2dd55720f59a04134dd0","observation_id":"e4047ab3-1937-40f7-8b9c-f670e5675eb9","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-08-06T23:10:24.498510Z","resolver_source":null,"status":"unresolved"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"reason":"canonical_work_link_unavailable","source_receipts":[],"state":"unavailable"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","doi":"10.48550/arxiv.2503.08679","metadata_source":"pith","pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-05T02:28:24.338817Z","title":"Chain-of-thought reasoning in the wild is not always faithful.arXiv preprint:2503.08679","venue":"cs.AI","work_id":"221c289d-ba9c-41b9-a1d6-7ea026fdcc9b","year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2506.19807","last_updated":"2026-04-16T16:50:02Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-07-06T21:47:01.972372Z","submitted_at":"2025-06-24T17:17:17Z","title":"KnowRL: Exploring Knowledgeable Reinforcement Learning for Factuality","version":4},"reference_index":1,"source":"pdf_text","source_observed_at":"2026-05-19T07:33:08.719028Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2506.19807"},"observation_digest":"sha256:a667512015986ccb148ea78b49057598cfeed7ab98d81b5cf684e12a02d13598","observation_id":"311a0f42-6e0d-4e61-8cb5-2c1e3812b90f","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-06-01T03:02:49.618587Z","resolver_source":"arxiv_id","status":"metadata_mismatch"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"observation":"No event found in the named queried sources as of 2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00.","reason":null,"source_receipts":[{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00","source":"crossref"},{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:30:57.382061+00:00","source":"retraction_watch"}],"state":"measured"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":null,"doi":null,"metadata_source":null,"pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-06T22:03:50.831268Z","title":"Chain-of-thought reasoning in the wild is not always faithful.arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.08679, 2025","venue":null,"work_id":null,"year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2506.22777","last_updated":"2025-07-13T15:36:35Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-10T05:25:44.170625Z","submitted_at":"2025-06-28T06:37:10Z","title":"Teaching Models to Verbalize Reward Hacking in Chain-of-Thought Reasoning","version":2},"reference_index":4,"source":"pdf_text","source_observed_at":"2026-08-06T22:03:50.831268Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2506.22777"},"observation_digest":"sha256:84c09a6f91f2d1faef2cb811c0e80fe8b3b87483085e7e4ada0f2f1428dccfd4","observation_id":"2ad3bb70-9718-4362-9b7b-5b5f34ad5512","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-08-06T22:03:50.831268Z","resolver_source":null,"status":"unresolved"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"reason":"canonical_work_link_unavailable","source_receipts":[],"state":"unavailable"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":null,"doi":null,"metadata_source":null,"pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-06T18:57:12.997242Z","title":"Chain-of-thought reasoning in the wild is not always faithful","venue":null,"work_id":null,"year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2507.06980","last_updated":"2025-07-09T16:07:20Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-10T05:42:08.725965Z","submitted_at":"2025-07-09T16:07:20Z","title":"Are They All Good? Evaluating the Quality of CoTs in LLM-based Code Generation","version":1},"reference_index":4,"source":"pdf_text","source_observed_at":"2026-08-06T18:57:12.997242Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2507.06980"},"observation_digest":"sha256:7871d46ff5c197d8a6beb26649a62aa720b701f501d70a52c23d16abc9672ec5","observation_id":"dddb8680-2d31-4975-acb9-d35b4364e831","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-08-06T18:57:12.997242Z","resolver_source":null,"status":"unresolved"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"reason":"canonical_work_link_unavailable","source_receipts":[],"state":"unavailable"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","doi":"10.48550/arxiv.2503.08679","metadata_source":"pith","pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-05T02:28:24.338817Z","title":"Chain-of-thought reasoning in the wild is not always faithful.arXiv preprint:2503.08679","venue":"cs.AI","work_id":"221c289d-ba9c-41b9-a1d6-7ea026fdcc9b","year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2507.09788","last_updated":"2026-06-09T02:50:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-06T17:44:56.681514Z","submitted_at":"2025-07-13T21:00:27Z","title":"TinyTroupe: An LLM-powered Multiagent Persona Simulation Toolkit","version":2},"reference_index":1,"source":"pdf_text","source_observed_at":"2026-05-19T04:54:38.908451Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2507.09788"},"observation_digest":"sha256:22629a5e5a09e76e3b45a95718718762f52a96e750b5ec491fa57f72aa43b15e","observation_id":"1cbfa818-0ff0-449f-8e6e-8defeacc35b9","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-06-01T03:02:49.618587Z","resolver_source":"arxiv_id","status":"verified_exact"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"observation":"No event found in the named queried sources as of 2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00.","reason":null,"source_receipts":[{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00","source":"crossref"},{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:30:57.382061+00:00","source":"retraction_watch"}],"state":"measured"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":null,"doi":null,"metadata_source":null,"pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-06T17:51:07.947618Z","title":"Chain-of-thought reasoning in the wild is not always faithful.arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.08679, 2025","venue":null,"work_id":null,"year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2507.09788","last_updated":"2026-06-09T02:50:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-06T17:44:56.681514Z","submitted_at":"2025-07-13T21:00:27Z","title":"TinyTroupe: An LLM-powered Multiagent Persona Simulation Toolkit","version":3},"reference_index":1,"source":"pdf_text","source_observed_at":"2026-08-06T17:51:07.947618Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2507.09788"},"observation_digest":"sha256:d0dd784a4385bd5758e16e39c0ad437be441c3f892339ea0bda16ce9639d0278","observation_id":"53e75451-60cd-4f23-857a-77f6bd6da8f1","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-08-06T17:51:07.947618Z","resolver_source":null,"status":"unresolved"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"reason":"canonical_work_link_unavailable","source_receipts":[],"state":"unavailable"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":null,"doi":null,"metadata_source":null,"pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-05T23:01:58.755678Z","title":null,"venue":null,"work_id":null,"year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2508.06017","last_updated":"2025-08-08T05:04:47Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-08T10:44:52.352035Z","submitted_at":"2025-08-08T05:04:47Z","title":"Position: Intelligent Coding Systems Should Write Programs with Justifications","version":1},"reference_index":4,"source":"pdf_text","source_observed_at":"2026-08-05T23:01:58.755678Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2508.06017"},"observation_digest":"sha256:3c8c58994ca93065380f03e211f1f887e742dd1be646baab899fbeb0c2c2a45b","observation_id":"ecf95395-fedf-4c66-8987-a59e164ad1b1","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-08-05T23:01:58.755678Z","resolver_source":null,"status":"unresolved"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"reason":"canonical_work_link_unavailable","source_receipts":[],"state":"unavailable"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":null,"doi":null,"metadata_source":null,"pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-05T17:40:52.629513Z","title":"Chain-of-thought reasoning in the wild is not always faithful.arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.08679, 2025","venue":null,"work_id":null,"year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2508.16695","last_updated":"2025-08-21T23:48:50Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-09T07:44:49.082659Z","submitted_at":"2025-08-21T23:48:50Z","title":"Do Cognitively Interpretable Reasoning Traces Improve LLM Performance?","version":1},"reference_index":1,"source":"pdf_text","source_observed_at":"2026-08-05T17:40:52.629513Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2508.16695"},"observation_digest":"sha256:04084b12c33e971856f93d3222ba9b8b05ebb4d924fb3172f1998d3def0f3ed9","observation_id":"87e6b6c7-e38f-4fa2-b7cf-efbaa83f6522","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-08-05T17:40:52.629513Z","resolver_source":null,"status":"unresolved"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"reason":"canonical_work_link_unavailable","source_receipts":[],"state":"unavailable"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":null,"doi":null,"metadata_source":null,"pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-05T15:30:30.158836Z","title":null,"venue":null,"work_id":null,"year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2508.19827","last_updated":"2025-08-27T12:25:29Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-10T23:07:22.077447Z","submitted_at":"2025-08-27T12:25:29Z","title":"Analysing Chain of Thought Dynamics: Active Guidance or Unfaithful Post-hoc Rationalisation?","version":1},"reference_index":2,"source":"arxiv_source","source_observed_at":"2026-08-05T15:30:30.158836Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2508.19827"},"observation_digest":"sha256:bbe52ffd445e112e382cfa6cf990feeeb79537fa0abb9ed434306baf07bab4ac","observation_id":"1331e4bc-038e-4a13-9748-b01e2c52454f","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-08-05T15:30:30.158836Z","resolver_source":null,"status":"unresolved"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"reason":"canonical_work_link_unavailable","source_receipts":[],"state":"unavailable"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":null,"doi":null,"metadata_source":null,"pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-05T15:18:50.382652Z","title":"Chain-of-thought reasoning in the wild is not always faithful","venue":null,"work_id":null,"year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2508.20018","last_updated":"2025-08-27T16:27:19Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-08T06:36:18.346761Z","submitted_at":"2025-08-27T16:27:19Z","title":"SWIRL: A Staged Workflow for Interleaved Reinforcement Learning in Mobile GUI Control","version":1},"reference_index":1,"source":"arxiv_source","source_observed_at":"2026-08-05T15:18:50.382652Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2508.20018"},"observation_digest":"sha256:d02eb9c64325a2804f519cd30f22400c010b812473540646caa3fa969fd81487","observation_id":"19a9428a-3b77-4944-a35d-8b37187c5f34","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-08-05T15:18:50.382652Z","resolver_source":null,"status":"unresolved"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"reason":"canonical_work_link_unavailable","source_receipts":[],"state":"unavailable"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":null,"doi":null,"metadata_source":null,"pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-05T13:05:31.857966Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","venue":null,"work_id":null,"year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2509.00971","last_updated":"2025-09-03T05:36:42Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-10T04:46:08.121235Z","submitted_at":"2025-08-31T19:31:53Z","title":"CoreThink: A Symbolic Reasoning Layer to reason over Long Horizon Tasks with LLMs","version":2},"reference_index":1,"source":"pdf_text","source_observed_at":"2026-08-05T13:05:31.857966Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2509.00971"},"observation_digest":"sha256:44a4fc71425b199943fb4b3ac7f65a8895212c66b1572c980065d4ffc474984e","observation_id":"cdb19087-9a0a-42eb-939b-20c32f6f35da","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-08-05T13:05:31.857966Z","resolver_source":null,"status":"unresolved"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"reason":"canonical_work_link_unavailable","source_receipts":[],"state":"unavailable"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":null,"doi":null,"metadata_source":null,"pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-05T10:39:04.414376Z","title":"Chain-of- thought reasoning in the wild is not always faithful","venue":null,"work_id":null,"year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2509.03871","last_updated":"2025-09-04T04:12:31Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-08T03:54:26.940042Z","submitted_at":"2025-09-04T04:12:31Z","title":"A Comprehensive Survey on Trustworthiness in Reasoning with Large Language Models","version":1},"reference_index":80,"source":"pdf_text","source_observed_at":"2026-08-05T10:39:04.414376Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2509.03871"},"observation_digest":"sha256:0be9c92eea788ca3f4901421f1b361b571df178d07fa246d68563766ced96c6f","observation_id":"2dd18d34-1be3-434d-8793-e115c674b165","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-08-05T10:39:04.414376Z","resolver_source":null,"status":"unresolved"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"reason":"canonical_work_link_unavailable","source_receipts":[],"state":"unavailable"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","doi":"10.48550/arxiv.2503.08679","metadata_source":"pith","pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-05T02:28:24.338817Z","title":"Chain-of-thought reasoning in the wild is not always faithful.arXiv preprint:2503.08679","venue":"cs.AI","work_id":"221c289d-ba9c-41b9-a1d6-7ea026fdcc9b","year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2509.08827","last_updated":"2025-10-09T17:08:52Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-06T15:38:05.011922Z","submitted_at":"2025-09-10T17:59:43Z","title":"A Survey of Reinforcement Learning for Large Reasoning Models","version":3},"reference_index":20,"source":"arxiv_source","source_observed_at":"2026-05-18T00:02:24.352947Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2509.08827"},"observation_digest":"sha256:13762d4de0ec122924d74f66065f8be0201c161f9942d00f4df1d9a48aa0339a","observation_id":"f6edb149-d740-45bc-9538-5a21a51714b3","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-06-01T03:02:49.618587Z","resolver_source":"arxiv_id","status":"verified_exact"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"observation":"No event found in the named queried sources as of 2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00.","reason":null,"source_receipts":[{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00","source":"crossref"},{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:30:57.382061+00:00","source":"retraction_watch"}],"state":"measured"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":null,"doi":null,"metadata_source":null,"pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-04T10:40:42.437398Z","title":null,"venue":null,"work_id":null,"year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2510.09278","last_updated":"2026-06-28T16:27:56Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-08T22:59:31.970086Z","submitted_at":"2025-10-10T11:21:09Z","title":"CLARity: Reasoning Consistency Alone Can Teach Reinforced Experts","version":2},"reference_index":2,"source":"arxiv_source","source_observed_at":"2026-08-04T10:40:42.437398Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2510.09278"},"observation_digest":"sha256:fa8cecbbcb0b7ea0605c453c95c4ee72ab4912b13d3cc5669b5960b9062a6cab","observation_id":"77f1045f-9409-4096-9730-639a51ae7717","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-08-04T10:40:42.437398Z","resolver_source":null,"status":"unresolved"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"reason":"canonical_work_link_unavailable","source_receipts":[],"state":"unavailable"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":null,"doi":null,"metadata_source":null,"pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-04T09:50:41.886859Z","title":null,"venue":null,"work_id":null,"year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2510.13272","last_updated":"2026-06-03T06:16:13Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-09T22:49:51.379892Z","submitted_at":"2025-10-15T08:17:52Z","title":"Beyond Correctness: Rewarding Faithful Reasoning in Retrieval-Augmented Generation","version":3},"reference_index":3,"source":"arxiv_source","source_observed_at":"2026-08-04T09:50:41.886859Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2510.13272"},"observation_digest":"sha256:5e244ec207f217bb2c31af6fe7a68e54da926d6d5c649963de2d317e2e05186a","observation_id":"f1acdbd2-4445-433e-8b26-90251c95d133","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-08-04T09:50:41.886859Z","resolver_source":null,"status":"unresolved"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"reason":"canonical_work_link_unavailable","source_receipts":[],"state":"unavailable"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":null,"doi":null,"metadata_source":null,"pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-04T09:08:53.755726Z","title":"Chain-of-thought reasoning in the wild is not always faithful.arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.08679, 2025","venue":null,"work_id":null,"year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2510.17256","last_updated":"2026-06-03T19:38:37Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-08T10:07:33.427560Z","submitted_at":"2025-10-20T07:43:53Z","title":"Explainability of Large Language Models: Opportunities and Challenges toward Generating Trustworthy Explanations","version":2},"reference_index":56,"source":"pdf_text","source_observed_at":"2026-08-04T09:08:53.755726Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2510.17256"},"observation_digest":"sha256:ebe290416eeea816ce2a72ea9d04b8c6d76a11052c38f0e6a51b69241442d65e","observation_id":"f709fc83-dfe9-4e63-8e2c-1254a68959fb","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-08-04T09:08:53.755726Z","resolver_source":null,"status":"unresolved"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"reason":"canonical_work_link_unavailable","source_receipts":[],"state":"unavailable"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","doi":"10.48550/arxiv.2503.08679","metadata_source":"pith","pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-05T02:28:24.338817Z","title":"Chain-of-thought reasoning in the wild is not always faithful.arXiv preprint:2503.08679","venue":"cs.AI","work_id":"221c289d-ba9c-41b9-a1d6-7ea026fdcc9b","year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2510.24941","last_updated":"2026-05-26T22:58:09Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-08T14:16:18.113872Z","submitted_at":"2025-10-28T20:14:02Z","title":"Can Aha Moments Be Fake? Towards Quantifying Decorative and True Thinking in Chain-of-Thought","version":3},"reference_index":1,"source":"pdf_text","source_observed_at":"2026-05-18T02:44:48.729794Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2510.24941"},"observation_digest":"sha256:0f7e513c92b94ea3de7617717be91c535186ae7ae1e6a2a654f208d42023b1a2","observation_id":"e7d357cd-022e-450a-8303-13b307615b75","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-06-01T03:02:49.618587Z","resolver_source":"arxiv_id","status":"verified_exact"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"observation":"No event found in the named queried sources as of 2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00.","reason":null,"source_receipts":[{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00","source":"crossref"},{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:30:57.382061+00:00","source":"retraction_watch"}],"state":"measured"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":null,"doi":null,"metadata_source":null,"pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-04T07:43:09.181699Z","title":"Chain-of-thought reasoning in the wild is not always faithful.arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.08679,","venue":null,"work_id":null,"year":null},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2510.24941","last_updated":"2026-05-26T22:58:09Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-08T14:16:18.113872Z","submitted_at":"2025-10-28T20:14:02Z","title":"Can Aha Moments Be Fake? Towards Quantifying Decorative and True Thinking in Chain-of-Thought","version":4},"reference_index":1,"source":"pdf_text","source_observed_at":"2026-08-04T07:43:09.181699Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2510.24941"},"observation_digest":"sha256:bd51bbd75c5d0df5c9886aefbc478b70cc1817910dd2a2e2de57473d1f12d8f0","observation_id":"31e59c10-a00b-4c74-8dbc-1e53c2171a5e","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-08-04T07:43:09.181699Z","resolver_source":null,"status":"unresolved"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"reason":"canonical_work_link_unavailable","source_receipts":[],"state":"unavailable"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","doi":"10.48550/arxiv.2503.08679","metadata_source":"pith","pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-05T02:28:24.338817Z","title":"Chain-of-thought reasoning in the wild is not always faithful.arXiv preprint:2503.08679","venue":"cs.AI","work_id":"221c289d-ba9c-41b9-a1d6-7ea026fdcc9b","year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2510.25741","last_updated":"2026-07-01T23:25:58Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-04T07:30:51.188041Z","submitted_at":"2025-10-29T17:45:42Z","title":"Scaling Latent Reasoning via Looped Language Models","version":4},"reference_index":74,"source":"pdf_text","source_observed_at":"2026-05-15T07:43:11.620446Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2510.25741"},"observation_digest":"sha256:5d6267d7a97964aedff96a74c2987dab321ca5a2c36b262e8b40206426429ea0","observation_id":"c6361836-f748-47cc-b3c4-a4e614fd20ac","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-06-01T03:02:49.618587Z","resolver_source":"arxiv_id","status":"verified_exact"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"observation":"No event found in the named queried sources as of 2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00.","reason":null,"source_receipts":[{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00","source":"crossref"},{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:30:57.382061+00:00","source":"retraction_watch"}],"state":"measured"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":null,"doi":null,"metadata_source":null,"pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-04T07:31:49.221545Z","title":"Chain-of-thought reasoning in the wild is not always faithful.arXiv preprint arXiv: 2503.08679, 2025","venue":null,"work_id":null,"year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2510.25741","last_updated":"2026-07-01T23:25:58Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-04T07:30:51.188041Z","submitted_at":"2025-10-29T17:45:42Z","title":"Scaling Latent Reasoning via Looped Language Models","version":5},"reference_index":74,"source":"pdf_text","source_observed_at":"2026-08-04T07:31:49.221545Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2510.25741"},"observation_digest":"sha256:271bb96afbd3c8181df57161999fc60016cb50ed4d8e4f3ae2592b74ca505668","observation_id":"406e97bc-d75b-4dc4-bcde-e8963e4f5691","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-08-04T07:31:49.221545Z","resolver_source":null,"status":"unresolved"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"reason":"canonical_work_link_unavailable","source_receipts":[],"state":"unavailable"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","doi":"10.48550/arxiv.2503.08679","metadata_source":"pith","pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-05T02:28:24.338817Z","title":"Chain-of-thought reasoning in the wild is not always faithful.arXiv preprint:2503.08679","venue":"cs.AI","work_id":"221c289d-ba9c-41b9-a1d6-7ea026fdcc9b","year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2511.17069","last_updated":"2026-04-22T06:20:43Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:13:51.785923Z","submitted_at":"2025-11-21T09:19:05Z","title":"Interpretability from the Ground Up: Stakeholder-Centric Design of Automated Scoring in Educational Assessments","version":3},"reference_index":2,"source":"arxiv_source","source_observed_at":"2026-05-17T21:02:32.788289Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2511.17069"},"observation_digest":"sha256:a7a8bf315ea38874f397674eb51242fae68e84f5c4733a2bbfa88afc162b529e","observation_id":"d723168a-93a1-4914-9770-99db91369060","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-06-01T03:02:49.618587Z","resolver_source":"arxiv_id","status":"verified_exact"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"observation":"No event found in the named queried sources as of 2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00.","reason":null,"source_receipts":[{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00","source":"crossref"},{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:30:57.382061+00:00","source":"retraction_watch"}],"state":"measured"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","doi":"10.48550/arxiv.2503.08679","metadata_source":"pith","pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-05T02:28:24.338817Z","title":"Chain-of-thought reasoning in the wild is not always faithful.arXiv preprint:2503.08679","venue":"cs.AI","work_id":"221c289d-ba9c-41b9-a1d6-7ea026fdcc9b","year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2602.04003","last_updated":"2026-05-15T16:48:29Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-07-06T22:44:23.981940Z","submitted_at":"2026-02-03T20:42:44Z","title":"When AI Persuades: Adversarial Explanation Attacks on Human Trust in AI-Assisted Decision Making","version":3},"reference_index":5,"source":"pdf_text","source_observed_at":"2026-05-21T13:21:45.525765Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2602.04003"},"observation_digest":"sha256:384e80d3ef6c9ac8e8e9321f9afa8938ac1795b1f0c90df8b6f41966737377d1","observation_id":"784a0bf0-189b-46ae-a61e-aee5a720143b","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-06-01T03:02:49.618587Z","resolver_source":"arxiv_id","status":"verified_exact"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"observation":"No event found in the named queried sources as of 2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00.","reason":null,"source_receipts":[{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00","source":"crossref"},{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:30:57.382061+00:00","source":"retraction_watch"}],"state":"measured"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","doi":"10.48550/arxiv.2503.08679","metadata_source":"pith","pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-05T02:28:24.338817Z","title":"Chain-of-thought reasoning in the wild is not always faithful.arXiv preprint:2503.08679","venue":"cs.AI","work_id":"221c289d-ba9c-41b9-a1d6-7ea026fdcc9b","year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2604.13392","last_updated":"2026-05-19T05:20:16Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-02T08:29:04.819618Z","submitted_at":"2026-04-15T01:43:00Z","title":"ReSS: Learning Reasoning Models for Tabular Data Prediction via Symbolic Scaffold","version":1},"reference_index":3,"source":"arxiv_source","source_observed_at":"2026-05-10T13:57:36.981142Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2604.13392"},"observation_digest":"sha256:e2cbfad5f714db56176e6b3198d9be355bc5bc21597cde8ba13edbe60b7bd47a","observation_id":"acdeba73-909b-4153-8070-569ed35b01c1","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-06-01T03:02:49.618587Z","resolver_source":"arxiv_id","status":"verified_exact"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"observation":"No event found in the named queried sources as of 2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00.","reason":null,"source_receipts":[{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00","source":"crossref"},{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:30:57.382061+00:00","source":"retraction_watch"}],"state":"measured"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","doi":"10.48550/arxiv.2503.08679","metadata_source":"pith","pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-05T02:28:24.338817Z","title":"Chain-of-thought reasoning in the wild is not always faithful.arXiv preprint:2503.08679","venue":"cs.AI","work_id":"221c289d-ba9c-41b9-a1d6-7ea026fdcc9b","year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2604.13392","last_updated":"2026-05-19T05:20:16Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-02T08:29:04.819618Z","submitted_at":"2026-04-15T01:43:00Z","title":"ReSS: Learning Reasoning Models for Tabular Data Prediction via Symbolic Scaffold","version":2},"reference_index":3,"source":"arxiv_source","source_observed_at":"2026-05-21T01:00:20.188501Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2604.13392"},"observation_digest":"sha256:37d3684f3f491129af80aee48a38d25ede91d9955e995c078c136a9ec591eafa","observation_id":"ede4e4e2-5534-4676-af24-15b61800fd2b","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-06-01T03:02:49.618587Z","resolver_source":"arxiv_id","status":"verified_exact"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"observation":"No event found in the named queried sources as of 2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00.","reason":null,"source_receipts":[{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00","source":"crossref"},{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:30:57.382061+00:00","source":"retraction_watch"}],"state":"measured"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","doi":"10.48550/arxiv.2503.08679","metadata_source":"pith","pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-05T02:28:24.338817Z","title":"Chain-of-thought reasoning in the wild is not always faithful.arXiv preprint:2503.08679","venue":"cs.AI","work_id":"221c289d-ba9c-41b9-a1d6-7ea026fdcc9b","year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2604.15726","last_updated":"2026-04-17T05:59:08Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-01T01:44:21.919940Z","submitted_at":"2026-04-17T05:59:08Z","title":"LLM Reasoning Is Latent, Not the Chain of Thought","version":1},"reference_index":29,"source":"pdf_text","source_observed_at":"2026-05-10T08:49:05.178087Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2604.15726"},"observation_digest":"sha256:63b16c1fc4348685c5dab93ac491174554aa6188ef6ee6523aa3cebb932ed1f2","observation_id":"e25d97f8-ffe5-45e2-a9f8-e2f888310d97","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-06-01T03:02:49.618587Z","resolver_source":"arxiv_id","status":"verified_exact"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"observation":"No event found in the named queried sources as of 2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00.","reason":null,"source_receipts":[{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00","source":"crossref"},{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:30:57.382061+00:00","source":"retraction_watch"}],"state":"measured"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","doi":"10.48550/arxiv.2503.08679","metadata_source":"pith","pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-05T02:28:24.338817Z","title":"Chain-of-thought reasoning in the wild is not always faithful.arXiv preprint:2503.08679","venue":"cs.AI","work_id":"221c289d-ba9c-41b9-a1d6-7ea026fdcc9b","year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2605.01048","last_updated":"2026-05-01T19:23:33Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-07-06T23:14:20.123289Z","submitted_at":"2026-05-01T19:23:33Z","title":"Compared to What? Baselines and Metrics for Counterfactual Prompting","version":1},"reference_index":47,"source":"arxiv_source","source_observed_at":"2026-05-09T19:02:46.991897Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2605.01048"},"observation_digest":"sha256:6bde92d66864e7caefc43c3c741d9743009b08833e867bdfab0d5af26772ecc0","observation_id":"3e39f9fd-9175-45fd-8256-cf26c7a51918","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-06-01T03:02:49.618587Z","resolver_source":"arxiv_id","status":"verified_exact"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"observation":"No event found in the named queried sources as of 2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00.","reason":null,"source_receipts":[{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00","source":"crossref"},{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:30:57.382061+00:00","source":"retraction_watch"}],"state":"measured"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","doi":"10.48550/arxiv.2503.08679","metadata_source":"pith","pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-05T02:28:24.338817Z","title":"Chain-of-thought reasoning in the wild is not always faithful.arXiv preprint:2503.08679","venue":"cs.AI","work_id":"221c289d-ba9c-41b9-a1d6-7ea026fdcc9b","year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2605.07353","last_updated":"2026-05-08T07:08:25Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-10T20:55:40.793400Z","submitted_at":"2026-05-08T07:08:25Z","title":"Confidence-Aware Alignment Makes Reasoning LLMs More Reliable","version":1},"reference_index":1,"source":"pdf_text","source_observed_at":"2026-05-11T02:10:40.020460Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2605.07353"},"observation_digest":"sha256:7ad8b37db897ce58e0fe965c4a31d31cf7994b0f527358940578e9877c1cc760","observation_id":"12b37a5b-f300-456e-a9ec-00c3ebcb2ccd","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-06-01T03:02:49.618587Z","resolver_source":"arxiv_id","status":"verified_exact"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"observation":"No event found in the named queried sources as of 2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00.","reason":null,"source_receipts":[{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00","source":"crossref"},{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:30:57.382061+00:00","source":"retraction_watch"}],"state":"measured"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","doi":"10.48550/arxiv.2503.08679","metadata_source":"pith","pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-05T02:28:24.338817Z","title":"Chain-of-thought reasoning in the wild is not always faithful.arXiv preprint:2503.08679","venue":"cs.AI","work_id":"221c289d-ba9c-41b9-a1d6-7ea026fdcc9b","year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2605.10930","last_updated":"2026-05-15T20:34:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-07-06T23:22:52.369277Z","submitted_at":"2026-05-11T17:58:12Z","title":"Evaluating the False Trust Engendered by LLM Explanations","version":1},"reference_index":52,"source":"pdf_text","source_observed_at":"2026-05-12T03:27:29.025166Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2605.10930"},"observation_digest":"sha256:7ca6b3b0b7b3ea6c60f9cded4de80fdf36584498f23091a19400a45188f448d2","observation_id":"87db8dcf-3462-467c-a315-c31a58610d26","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-06-01T03:02:49.618587Z","resolver_source":"arxiv_id","status":"verified_exact"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"observation":"No event found in the named queried sources as of 2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00.","reason":null,"source_receipts":[{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00","source":"crossref"},{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:30:57.382061+00:00","source":"retraction_watch"}],"state":"measured"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","doi":"10.48550/arxiv.2503.08679","metadata_source":"pith","pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-05T02:28:24.338817Z","title":"Chain-of-thought reasoning in the wild is not always faithful.arXiv preprint:2503.08679","venue":"cs.AI","work_id":"221c289d-ba9c-41b9-a1d6-7ea026fdcc9b","year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2605.10930","last_updated":"2026-05-15T20:34:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-07-06T23:22:52.369277Z","submitted_at":"2026-05-11T17:58:12Z","title":"Evaluating the False Trust Engendered by LLM Explanations","version":2},"reference_index":52,"source":"pdf_text","source_observed_at":"2026-05-20T21:53:37.211145Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2605.10930"},"observation_digest":"sha256:e796175efc3b762ed7e47d96063a4b350c4930bb883c4fa8876e140e0bb8fce4","observation_id":"0de77f20-3079-4254-8484-40b09a7ed8fb","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-06-01T03:02:49.618587Z","resolver_source":"arxiv_id","status":"verified_exact"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"observation":"No event found in the named queried sources as of 2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00.","reason":null,"source_receipts":[{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00","source":"crossref"},{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:30:57.382061+00:00","source":"retraction_watch"}],"state":"measured"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","doi":"10.48550/arxiv.2503.08679","metadata_source":"pith","pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-05T02:28:24.338817Z","title":"Chain-of-thought reasoning in the wild is not always faithful.arXiv preprint:2503.08679","venue":"cs.AI","work_id":"221c289d-ba9c-41b9-a1d6-7ea026fdcc9b","year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2605.11388","last_updated":"2026-05-12T01:21:37Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-07-06T23:23:16.461539Z","submitted_at":"2026-05-12T01:21:37Z","title":"Deep Reasoning in General Purpose Agents via Structured Meta-Cognition","version":1},"reference_index":88,"source":"arxiv_source","source_observed_at":"2026-05-13T02:47:10.398564Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2605.11388"},"observation_digest":"sha256:cf278aaf44be12fc3e1edc9e914221adce6c7a2c9ac1ae86a1bc7ae940a8b026","observation_id":"5fa3958e-b342-4153-adce-24cfe02f2460","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-06-01T03:02:49.618587Z","resolver_source":"arxiv_id","status":"verified_exact"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"observation":"No event found in the named queried sources as of 2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00.","reason":null,"source_receipts":[{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00","source":"crossref"},{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:30:57.382061+00:00","source":"retraction_watch"}],"state":"measured"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","doi":"10.48550/arxiv.2503.08679","metadata_source":"pith","pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-05T02:28:24.338817Z","title":"Chain-of-thought reasoning in the wild is not always faithful.arXiv preprint:2503.08679","venue":"cs.AI","work_id":"221c289d-ba9c-41b9-a1d6-7ea026fdcc9b","year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2605.11746","last_updated":"2026-05-12T08:24:47Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-03T19:32:09.592136Z","submitted_at":"2026-05-12T08:24:47Z","title":"When Reasoning Traces Become Performative: Step-Level Evidence that Chain-of-Thought Is an Imperfect Oversight Channel","version":1},"reference_index":2,"source":"pdf_text","source_observed_at":"2026-05-13T06:30:12.558660Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2605.11746"},"observation_digest":"sha256:f4b4f1359126b80560749d903ca38d65cb25e0f4919b94f7d00bca46e680749e","observation_id":"817312d5-2378-4b74-b334-5e8c9f5aaa83","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-06-01T03:02:49.618587Z","resolver_source":"arxiv_id","status":"verified_exact"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"observation":"No event found in the named queried sources as of 2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00.","reason":null,"source_receipts":[{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00","source":"crossref"},{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:30:57.382061+00:00","source":"retraction_watch"}],"state":"measured"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","doi":"10.48550/arxiv.2503.08679","metadata_source":"pith","pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-05T02:28:24.338817Z","title":"Chain-of-thought reasoning in the wild is not always faithful.arXiv preprint:2503.08679","venue":"cs.AI","work_id":"221c289d-ba9c-41b9-a1d6-7ea026fdcc9b","year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2605.19228","last_updated":"2026-06-07T18:34:11Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-07-31T16:56:03.737552Z","submitted_at":"2026-05-19T00:57:51Z","title":"Diagnosing Multi-step Reasoning Failures in Black-box LLMs via Stepwise Confidence Attribution","version":1},"reference_index":38,"source":"arxiv_source","source_observed_at":"2026-05-20T06:43:23.870127Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2605.19228"},"observation_digest":"sha256:fa37fd91ebece3e5496cf938587c5c4733ea26d46a01a34c569b28f682c3808b","observation_id":"bd88a687-d925-4417-9db9-72c31c0bdc41","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-06-01T03:02:49.618587Z","resolver_source":"arxiv_id","status":"verified_exact"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"observation":"No event found in the named queried sources as of 2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00.","reason":null,"source_receipts":[{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00","source":"crossref"},{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:30:57.382061+00:00","source":"retraction_watch"}],"state":"measured"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","doi":"10.48550/arxiv.2503.08679","metadata_source":"pith","pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-05T02:28:24.338817Z","title":"Chain-of-thought reasoning in the wild is not always faithful.arXiv preprint:2503.08679","venue":"cs.AI","work_id":"221c289d-ba9c-41b9-a1d6-7ea026fdcc9b","year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2605.22870","last_updated":"2026-05-20T00:32:41Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-02T01:45:01.340059Z","submitted_at":"2026-05-20T00:32:41Z","title":"The Readout Shortcut: Positional Number Copying Dominates Arithmetic CoT Readout in Small Language Models","version":1},"reference_index":2,"source":"arxiv_source","source_observed_at":"2026-05-25T06:27:42.024094Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2605.22870"},"observation_digest":"sha256:57b384368032f47e5eb17b831326e4823812e69fe0d05f362dc3fd89d704f41b","observation_id":"d8320dad-b0be-4e3b-918b-d58655a82e11","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-06-01T03:02:49.618587Z","resolver_source":"arxiv_id","status":"verified_exact"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"observation":"No event found in the named queried sources as of 2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00.","reason":null,"source_receipts":[{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00","source":"crossref"},{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:30:57.382061+00:00","source":"retraction_watch"}],"state":"measured"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","doi":"10.48550/arxiv.2503.08679","metadata_source":"pith","pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-05T02:28:24.338817Z","title":"Chain-of-thought reasoning in the wild is not always faithful.arXiv preprint:2503.08679","venue":"cs.AI","work_id":"221c289d-ba9c-41b9-a1d6-7ea026fdcc9b","year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2605.24286","last_updated":"2026-05-22T23:37:29Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-07-31T20:22:37.981127Z","submitted_at":"2026-05-22T23:37:29Z","title":"Faithfulness as Information Flow: Evaluating and Training Faithful Chain-of-Thought Reasoning","version":1},"reference_index":8,"source":"pdf_text","source_observed_at":"2026-06-30T15:29:34.096277Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2605.24286"},"observation_digest":"sha256:26c110806dd1afea213ef9e7f0e92cd126ae4ea99836165fd64cbcbe867e76ae","observation_id":"891d14cb-99e1-4ffe-a516-c78d6ebd3e47","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-06-30T15:34:48.035904Z","resolver_source":"local_arxiv","status":"verified_exact"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"observation":"No event found in the named queried sources as of 2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00.","reason":null,"source_receipts":[{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00","source":"crossref"},{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:30:57.382061+00:00","source":"retraction_watch"}],"state":"measured"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","doi":"10.48550/arxiv.2503.08679","metadata_source":"pith","pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-05T02:28:24.338817Z","title":"Chain-of-thought reasoning in the wild is not always faithful.arXiv preprint:2503.08679","venue":"cs.AI","work_id":"221c289d-ba9c-41b9-a1d6-7ea026fdcc9b","year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2605.24396","last_updated":"2026-05-23T04:42:45Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-08T23:48:46.091037Z","submitted_at":"2026-05-23T04:42:45Z","title":"Understanding and Mitigating Premature Confidence for Better LLM Reasoning","version":1},"reference_index":2,"source":"arxiv_source","source_observed_at":"2026-06-30T14:03:25.913615Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2605.24396"},"observation_digest":"sha256:4fd093400d613506fcf4b1ad7ac8746911abbe0f319a1479477c6a0def93fd72","observation_id":"3fe2150c-f828-4c41-87a6-2444b1bc2959","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-06-30T14:04:44.414531Z","resolver_source":"local_arxiv","status":"verified_exact"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"observation":"No event found in the named queried sources as of 2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00.","reason":null,"source_receipts":[{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00","source":"crossref"},{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:30:57.382061+00:00","source":"retraction_watch"}],"state":"measured"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","doi":"10.48550/arxiv.2503.08679","metadata_source":"pith","pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-05T02:28:24.338817Z","title":"Chain-of-thought reasoning in the wild is not always faithful.arXiv preprint:2503.08679","venue":"cs.AI","work_id":"221c289d-ba9c-41b9-a1d6-7ea026fdcc9b","year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2605.25603","last_updated":"2026-05-25T08:54:55Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-10T09:24:29.678831Z","submitted_at":"2026-05-25T08:54:55Z","title":"Detecting Unfaithful Chain-of-Thought via Circuit-Guided Internal-External Discrepancy","version":1},"reference_index":4,"source":"pdf_text","source_observed_at":"2026-06-29T21:47:17.894881Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2605.25603"},"observation_digest":"sha256:f212677511da8596113c84891a65f0333e02a3c7a593475f10edc86833b0341e","observation_id":"015fee4b-cd2e-466c-91cf-5c19db65ad7a","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-06-29T21:53:59.509298Z","resolver_source":"local_arxiv","status":"verified_exact"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"observation":"No event found in the named queried sources as of 2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00.","reason":null,"source_receipts":[{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00","source":"crossref"},{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:30:57.382061+00:00","source":"retraction_watch"}],"state":"measured"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","doi":"10.48550/arxiv.2503.08679","metadata_source":"pith","pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-05T02:28:24.338817Z","title":"Chain-of-thought reasoning in the wild is not always faithful.arXiv preprint:2503.08679","venue":"cs.AI","work_id":"221c289d-ba9c-41b9-a1d6-7ea026fdcc9b","year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2605.26795","last_updated":"2026-07-27T09:24:10Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-02T13:08:36.594565Z","submitted_at":"2026-05-26T10:10:01Z","title":"What Does Chain-of-Thought Contribute at Probe Time? Evidence for Local Co-Occurrence Activation","version":1},"reference_index":20,"source":"pdf_text","source_observed_at":"2026-06-29T17:24:32.401230Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2605.26795"},"observation_digest":"sha256:27bdc93a4efb0247b134bba6662ec5b5f90d41b2c7d8dd0600e8e7e5975eaaeb","observation_id":"e335a703-8459-43b5-bf75-eb80c96cf4cd","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-06-29T17:33:45.512215Z","resolver_source":"local_arxiv","status":"verified_exact"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"observation":"No event found in the named queried sources as of 2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00.","reason":null,"source_receipts":[{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00","source":"crossref"},{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:30:57.382061+00:00","source":"retraction_watch"}],"state":"measured"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":null,"doi":null,"metadata_source":null,"pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-02T13:08:40.058805Z","title":"Chain-of-thought reasoning in the wild is not always faithful.arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.08679, 2025","venue":null,"work_id":null,"year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2605.26795","last_updated":"2026-07-27T09:24:10Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-02T13:08:36.594565Z","submitted_at":"2026-05-26T10:10:01Z","title":"What Does Chain-of-Thought Contribute at Probe Time? Evidence for Local Co-Occurrence Activation","version":2},"reference_index":20,"source":"pdf_text","source_observed_at":"2026-08-02T13:08:40.058805Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2605.26795"},"observation_digest":"sha256:206bf88a6ceb1e108f6009e67988642ae3817aa74ac5221b2aaf44f6085c33d1","observation_id":"919221a4-713c-4b7c-a11c-cac4fe10542a","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-08-02T13:08:40.058805Z","resolver_source":null,"status":"unresolved"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"reason":"canonical_work_link_unavailable","source_receipts":[],"state":"unavailable"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","doi":"10.48550/arxiv.2503.08679","metadata_source":"pith","pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-05T02:28:24.338817Z","title":"Chain-of-thought reasoning in the wild is not always faithful.arXiv preprint:2503.08679","venue":"cs.AI","work_id":"221c289d-ba9c-41b9-a1d6-7ea026fdcc9b","year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2606.11445","last_updated":"2026-06-09T20:56:23Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T19:33:11.551966Z","submitted_at":"2026-06-09T20:56:23Z","title":"Forecasting Future Behavior as a Learning Task","version":1},"reference_index":53,"source":"arxiv_source","source_observed_at":"2026-06-27T12:55:39.494339Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2606.11445"},"observation_digest":"sha256:dc2cde624c3c075035d724816d091010d8fcf5a0d73f0df15e18a8b69e6208cc","observation_id":"f65a3bd3-0475-4cd6-ba98-10aa0fe87439","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-07-03T06:07:41.352894Z","resolver_source":"local_arxiv","status":"verified_exact"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"observation":"No event found in the named queried sources as of 2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00.","reason":null,"source_receipts":[{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00","source":"crossref"},{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:30:57.382061+00:00","source":"retraction_watch"}],"state":"measured"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","doi":"10.48550/arxiv.2503.08679","metadata_source":"pith","pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-05T02:28:24.338817Z","title":"Chain-of-thought reasoning in the wild is not always faithful.arXiv preprint:2503.08679","venue":"cs.AI","work_id":"221c289d-ba9c-41b9-a1d6-7ea026fdcc9b","year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2606.12689","last_updated":"2026-06-10T21:23:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-07-06T23:51:35.904251Z","submitted_at":"2026-06-10T21:23:22Z","title":"Observable Patterns Are Not Explanations: A Causal-Geometric Analysis of Latent Reasoning Models","version":1},"reference_index":55,"source":"arxiv_source","source_observed_at":"2026-06-27T09:36:05.700067Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2606.12689"},"observation_digest":"sha256:5f8fb6d44096e4b51e40e61ef4b9dbc7e588ca0b34e90a6186560a350d1c4759","observation_id":"ce64ce93-e475-4f2d-9290-61b6ba32b49e","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-07-03T11:18:03.828935Z","resolver_source":"local_arxiv","status":"verified_exact"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"observation":"No event found in the named queried sources as of 2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00.","reason":null,"source_receipts":[{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00","source":"crossref"},{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:30:57.382061+00:00","source":"retraction_watch"}],"state":"measured"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","doi":"10.48550/arxiv.2503.08679","metadata_source":"pith","pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-05T02:28:24.338817Z","title":"Chain-of-thought reasoning in the wild is not always faithful.arXiv preprint:2503.08679","venue":"cs.AI","work_id":"221c289d-ba9c-41b9-a1d6-7ea026fdcc9b","year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2606.15127","last_updated":"2026-06-19T06:10:08Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-07-06T23:52:32.998232Z","submitted_at":"2026-06-13T05:41:57Z","title":"Beyond Accuracy: Measuring Bias Acknowledgment in Chain-of-Thought Reasoning for Responsible AI Evaluation","version":2},"reference_index":1,"source":"pdf_text","source_observed_at":"2026-06-27T04:43:04.740925Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2606.15127"},"observation_digest":"sha256:5a4359138fd38cfee2d00ccc7a78fa2fd15ffa96617cc6ba8a056d8fe6492484","observation_id":"447b601f-3e95-4e48-9367-8fbd2feb2c6d","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-07-03T16:58:43.406916Z","resolver_source":"local_arxiv","status":"verified_exact"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"observation":"No event found in the named queried sources as of 2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00.","reason":null,"source_receipts":[{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00","source":"crossref"},{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:30:57.382061+00:00","source":"retraction_watch"}],"state":"measured"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","doi":"10.48550/arxiv.2503.08679","metadata_source":"pith","pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-05T02:28:24.338817Z","title":"Chain-of-thought reasoning in the wild is not always faithful.arXiv preprint:2503.08679","venue":"cs.AI","work_id":"221c289d-ba9c-41b9-a1d6-7ea026fdcc9b","year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2606.21121","last_updated":"2026-06-19T05:47:44Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-04T13:33:33.678027Z","submitted_at":"2026-06-19T05:47:44Z","title":"Answer Engineering: Local Trajectory Editing for Protocol-Constrained Decision Making in Large Language Models","version":1},"reference_index":3,"source":"arxiv_source","source_observed_at":"2026-06-26T14:13:13.678245Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2606.21121"},"observation_digest":"sha256:ae7c93774282ae85a66109f794721293432e3593fb92a073014444643f757d0d","observation_id":"d2805322-f0dd-4723-9ca3-bf133385f47b","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-07-04T06:49:37.545786Z","resolver_source":"local_arxiv","status":"verified_exact"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"observation":"No event found in the named queried sources as of 2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00.","reason":null,"source_receipts":[{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00","source":"crossref"},{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:30:57.382061+00:00","source":"retraction_watch"}],"state":"measured"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","doi":"10.48550/arxiv.2503.08679","metadata_source":"pith","pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-05T02:28:24.338817Z","title":"Chain-of-thought reasoning in the wild is not always faithful.arXiv preprint:2503.08679","venue":"cs.AI","work_id":"221c289d-ba9c-41b9-a1d6-7ea026fdcc9b","year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2606.25013","last_updated":"2026-06-23T17:59:01Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-03T16:39:59.297765Z","submitted_at":"2026-06-23T17:59:01Z","title":"Do Thinking Tokens Help with Safety?","version":1},"reference_index":38,"source":"arxiv_source","source_observed_at":"2026-06-25T23:37:49.412578Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2606.25013"},"observation_digest":"sha256:18112f45d341066021cf4ebd1030c9d76c4ac0db15b10af4a5ade2eb8a4392ee","observation_id":"95de15de-01a6-4a55-b4fe-52017bee5406","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-07-04T17:30:00.655029Z","resolver_source":"local_arxiv","status":"verified_exact"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"observation":"No event found in the named queried sources as of 2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00.","reason":null,"source_receipts":[{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00","source":"crossref"},{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:30:57.382061+00:00","source":"retraction_watch"}],"state":"measured"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","doi":"10.48550/arxiv.2503.08679","metadata_source":"pith","pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-05T02:28:24.338817Z","title":"Chain-of-thought reasoning in the wild is not always faithful.arXiv preprint:2503.08679","venue":"cs.AI","work_id":"221c289d-ba9c-41b9-a1d6-7ea026fdcc9b","year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2606.26935","last_updated":"2026-06-25T12:09:16Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-05T08:46:41.476055Z","submitted_at":"2026-06-25T12:09:16Z","title":"Where Do CoT Training Gains Land in LLM based Agents?","version":1},"reference_index":1,"source":"arxiv_source","source_observed_at":"2026-06-26T04:55:14.293452Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2606.26935"},"observation_digest":"sha256:fc4cab0ff7772a54a050d52fc8fe9b38a29f370f88b65a7c09892bf06c06916d","observation_id":"7bcea873-d6aa-4b6f-87f9-b44b317af510","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-07-04T13:49:51.539339Z","resolver_source":"local_arxiv","status":"verified_exact"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"observation":"No event found in the named queried sources as of 2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00.","reason":null,"source_receipts":[{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00","source":"crossref"},{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:30:57.382061+00:00","source":"retraction_watch"}],"state":"measured"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","doi":"10.48550/arxiv.2503.08679","metadata_source":"pith","pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-05T02:28:24.338817Z","title":"Chain-of-thought reasoning in the wild is not always faithful.arXiv preprint:2503.08679","venue":"cs.AI","work_id":"221c289d-ba9c-41b9-a1d6-7ea026fdcc9b","year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2607.01047","last_updated":"2026-07-01T15:08:02Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T14:53:02.059078Z","submitted_at":"2026-07-01T15:08:02Z","title":"Conversable Complexity: Agentic LLM Collectives as Interpretable Substrates","version":1},"reference_index":83,"source":"arxiv_source","source_observed_at":"2026-07-02T12:46:40.700728Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2607.01047"},"observation_digest":"sha256:b578cf7b71f39bb2f705d1016c6fd9547569bde01bfc6c532282513104873101","observation_id":"c6c31034-9380-40e9-84d2-dae4f9cd07e9","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-07-02T12:46:56.219034Z","resolver_source":"local_arxiv","status":"verified_exact"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"observation":"No event found in the named queried sources as of 2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00.","reason":null,"source_receipts":[{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00","source":"crossref"},{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:30:57.382061+00:00","source":"retraction_watch"}],"state":"measured"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":null,"doi":null,"metadata_source":null,"pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-07-12T02:02:49.492856Z","title":"arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.08679 , year=","venue":null,"work_id":null,"year":null},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2607.03502","last_updated":"2026-07-03T17:18:34Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-03T03:53:19.375179Z","submitted_at":"2026-07-03T17:18:34Z","title":"Reading Between the Dots: Decoding Hidden Computation across Filler Tokens","version":1},"reference_index":3,"source":"arxiv_source","source_observed_at":"2026-07-12T02:02:49.492856Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2607.03502"},"observation_digest":"sha256:3f0c0045131af444359c647dfe69a2e15e40cfe5433147e35077d0be97327ceb","observation_id":"a3dd1913-a81d-4e3c-a99e-1394705840ac","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-07-12T02:02:49.492856Z","resolver_source":null,"status":"unresolved"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"reason":"canonical_work_link_unavailable","source_receipts":[],"state":"unavailable"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":null,"doi":null,"metadata_source":null,"pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-07-11T17:05:29.695180Z","title":"Chain-of-thought reasoning in the wild is not always faithful,","venue":null,"work_id":null,"year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2607.04572","last_updated":"2026-07-21T06:03:17Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-10T09:24:30.463129Z","submitted_at":"2026-07-06T00:50:27Z","title":"Context-Masked Truncated Reasoning Audits for Answer-Key Dependence in LLM Tutors","version":1},"reference_index":16,"source":"pdf_text","source_observed_at":"2026-07-11T17:05:29.695180Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2607.04572"},"observation_digest":"sha256:7b46c5d6b22cd9754603c1e3c88f00beba67c6e11927d3ec369cf64432a3f31b","observation_id":"b1756608-8180-4040-92fc-3538414a25fe","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-07-11T17:05:29.695180Z","resolver_source":null,"status":"unresolved"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"reason":"canonical_work_link_unavailable","source_receipts":[],"state":"unavailable"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":null,"doi":null,"metadata_source":null,"pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-07-11T15:16:38.426751Z","title":"Arcuschin, J","venue":null,"work_id":null,"year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2607.04681","last_updated":"2026-07-06T05:10:27Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-09T21:21:26.100900Z","submitted_at":"2026-07-06T05:10:27Z","title":"Do Vision-Language-Action Models Mean What They Say? On the Role of Faithfulness in Embodied Reasoning","version":1},"reference_index":2,"source":"pdf_text","source_observed_at":"2026-07-11T15:16:38.426751Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2607.04681"},"observation_digest":"sha256:278da586ac7360970fc52e723f5b3328c37425a4a2c900fee7cec9b8facedba6","observation_id":"b2add7b3-a570-4564-b51a-b01d972bd8da","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-07-11T15:16:38.426751Z","resolver_source":null,"status":"unresolved"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"reason":"canonical_work_link_unavailable","source_receipts":[],"state":"unavailable"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","doi":"10.48550/arxiv.2503.08679","metadata_source":"pith","pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-05T02:28:24.338817Z","title":"Chain-of-thought reasoning in the wild is not always faithful.arXiv preprint:2503.08679","venue":"cs.AI","work_id":"221c289d-ba9c-41b9-a1d6-7ea026fdcc9b","year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2607.08066","last_updated":"2026-07-09T02:48:36Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-06T18:29:44.776853Z","submitted_at":"2026-07-09T02:48:36Z","title":"Persuasion Attacks Can Decrease Effectiveness of CoT Monitoring","version":1},"reference_index":79,"source":"arxiv_source","source_observed_at":"2026-07-10T00:52:47.537142Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2607.08066"},"observation_digest":"sha256:2718656516a477a2f6fd25f3d273c36cfb28f23c54a25981e485a28764d359a4","observation_id":"0fd9aef5-5d36-495a-842a-128c892cf410","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-07-10T00:56:41.060161Z","resolver_source":"local_arxiv","status":"verified_exact"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"observation":"No event found in the named queried sources as of 2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00.","reason":null,"source_receipts":[{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00","source":"crossref"},{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:30:57.382061+00:00","source":"retraction_watch"}],"state":"measured"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":null,"doi":null,"metadata_source":null,"pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-07-14T15:45:54.532529Z","title":"Chain-of-thought reasoning in the wild is not always faithful","venue":null,"work_id":null,"year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2607.09786","last_updated":"2026-08-02T18:21:10Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T05:12:04.880594Z","submitted_at":"2026-07-08T14:18:26Z","title":"Length Penalties Make Chain-of-Thought Less Monitorable","version":1},"reference_index":47,"source":"arxiv_source","source_observed_at":"2026-07-14T15:45:54.532529Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2607.09786"},"observation_digest":"sha256:6ecb555e1230a44d4021b7a5302f7bcc03e8994034ecca4337d2cced3e2915f3","observation_id":"ec75fd25-568c-4c41-b2aa-3a13edd5f3dc","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-07-14T15:45:54.532529Z","resolver_source":null,"status":"unresolved"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"reason":"canonical_work_link_unavailable","source_receipts":[],"state":"unavailable"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":null,"doi":null,"metadata_source":null,"pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-02T08:06:10.759079Z","title":"Chain-of-thought reasoning in the wild is not always faithful","venue":null,"work_id":null,"year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2607.09786","last_updated":"2026-08-02T18:21:10Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T05:12:04.880594Z","submitted_at":"2026-07-08T14:18:26Z","title":"Length Penalties Make Chain-of-Thought Less Monitorable","version":2},"reference_index":48,"source":"arxiv_source","source_observed_at":"2026-08-02T08:06:10.759079Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2607.09786"},"observation_digest":"sha256:6924deee836ce8852e854ed3ffbf4ff38071a4354c4639fced439f1fc5e7e26c","observation_id":"a4cd360a-c10f-419a-b72d-18e4acb12420","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-08-02T08:06:10.759079Z","resolver_source":null,"status":"unresolved"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"reason":"canonical_work_link_unavailable","source_receipts":[],"state":"unavailable"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":null,"doi":null,"metadata_source":null,"pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-04T04:30:26.776436Z","title":"Chain-of-thought reasoning in the wild is not always faithful","venue":null,"work_id":null,"year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2607.09786","last_updated":"2026-08-02T18:21:10Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T05:12:04.880594Z","submitted_at":"2026-07-08T14:18:26Z","title":"Length Penalties Make Chain-of-Thought Less Monitorable","version":3},"reference_index":3,"source":"arxiv_source","source_observed_at":"2026-08-04T04:30:26.776436Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2607.09786"},"observation_digest":"sha256:33b6d50410d9fb6a20f649be92eb2ec8cb176c7b236635c5d73ec3b9cc8125d2","observation_id":"82ffa36e-827e-434b-853f-66e4ade443c8","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-08-04T04:30:26.776436Z","resolver_source":null,"status":"unresolved"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"reason":"canonical_work_link_unavailable","source_receipts":[],"state":"unavailable"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":null,"doi":null,"metadata_source":null,"pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-02T01:55:04.455545Z","title":"arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.08679 , year=","venue":null,"work_id":null,"year":null},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2607.14528","last_updated":"2026-07-16T03:30:28Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-02T18:38:46.864989Z","submitted_at":"2026-07-16T03:30:28Z","title":"Controlled Reformulation Testing for Logical Consistency in Large Language Models","version":1},"reference_index":5,"source":"arxiv_source","source_observed_at":"2026-08-02T01:55:04.455545Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2607.14528"},"observation_digest":"sha256:0f74f3706f05d262488ff7cca742e8b715350a72599eae58bef928fba23c10d1","observation_id":"7e9ee9b0-a0b5-4d20-9c68-2ca6b429b1b9","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-08-02T01:55:04.455545Z","resolver_source":null,"status":"unresolved"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"reason":"canonical_work_link_unavailable","source_receipts":[],"state":"unavailable"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":null,"doi":null,"metadata_source":null,"pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-01T17:30:38.509216Z","title":"Chain-of-thought reasoning in the wild is not always faithful.arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.08679, 2025","venue":null,"work_id":null,"year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2607.17621","last_updated":"2026-07-20T07:17:50Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T22:58:38.461590Z","submitted_at":"2026-07-20T07:17:50Z","title":"Mechanistic Attention Guidance for Agent Memory Refinement","version":1},"reference_index":2,"source":"pdf_text","source_observed_at":"2026-08-01T17:30:38.509216Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2607.17621"},"observation_digest":"sha256:c17ede7fbf32f647fb6658cc73771e9ff4e2b363832ec1e6776123e4d18a93a8","observation_id":"05f8c993-b201-41c7-b42c-5b575121ab38","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-08-01T17:30:38.509216Z","resolver_source":null,"status":"unresolved"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"reason":"canonical_work_link_unavailable","source_receipts":[],"state":"unavailable"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":null,"doi":null,"metadata_source":null,"pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-02T09:22:00.540306Z","title":"arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.08679 , year=","venue":null,"work_id":null,"year":null},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2607.18293","last_updated":"2026-06-30T19:56:05Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-09T04:45:41.291747Z","submitted_at":"2026-06-30T19:56:05Z","title":"One Student, Many Teachers: Multi-Task On-Policy Distillation via Soft-Prompt Privileged Context","version":1},"reference_index":24,"source":"arxiv_source","source_observed_at":"2026-08-02T09:22:00.540306Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2607.18293"},"observation_digest":"sha256:6c31cdeea20fc536fd7ce8b56e82424f3441a802d9b0f780c890adbe9abe17b5","observation_id":"7de66025-d265-4f54-b74a-364463398050","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-08-02T09:22:00.540306Z","resolver_source":null,"status":"unresolved"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"reason":"canonical_work_link_unavailable","source_receipts":[],"state":"unavailable"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":null,"doi":null,"metadata_source":null,"pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-01T04:14:41.224620Z","title":"Chain-of-thought reasoning In The Wild is not always faithful","venue":null,"work_id":null,"year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2607.22925","last_updated":"2026-07-24T21:32:48Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-08T05:49:21.548828Z","submitted_at":"2026-07-24T21:32:48Z","title":"Not All LLM Reasoning is Visible in the Chain-of-Thought","version":1},"reference_index":1,"source":"arxiv_source","source_observed_at":"2026-08-01T04:14:41.224620Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2607.22925"},"observation_digest":"sha256:adfc63a5e08ea3b0f06c73e6eefedd84913c482a9503c4447c2492cc04a40ced","observation_id":"0106a6b7-a635-43f4-bb0a-93dca770eb44","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-08-01T04:14:41.224620Z","resolver_source":null,"status":"unresolved"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"reason":"canonical_work_link_unavailable","source_receipts":[],"state":"unavailable"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":null,"doi":null,"metadata_source":null,"pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-07-30T21:44:25.171383Z","title":null,"venue":null,"work_id":null,"year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2607.23458","last_updated":"2026-07-26T04:43:53Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-07-30T23:55:40.335733Z","submitted_at":"2026-07-26T04:43:53Z","title":"Two Regimes of Chain-of-Thought Unfaithfulness: Behavioral Detection Fails Where Models Are Wrong","version":1},"reference_index":26,"source":"arxiv_source","source_observed_at":"2026-07-30T21:44:25.171383Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2607.23458"},"observation_digest":"sha256:e9c046e41162ffecc1984dfde9cee0507bf0eee25427444b8f3ca95ed523d8ed","observation_id":"656cdbbf-656c-4531-827b-b2f40dc799bf","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-07-30T21:44:25.171383Z","resolver_source":null,"status":"unresolved"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"reason":"canonical_work_link_unavailable","source_receipts":[],"state":"unavailable"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":null,"doi":null,"metadata_source":null,"pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-01T01:52:56.666840Z","title":null,"venue":null,"work_id":null,"year":2024},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2607.25648","last_updated":"2026-07-28T12:34:04Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-05T22:34:51.407629Z","submitted_at":"2026-07-28T12:34:04Z","title":"Why Public Service AI Governance Frameworks Risk Failing in the Age of General-Purpose AI: Lessons from Policing","version":1},"reference_index":1,"source":"pdf_text","source_observed_at":"2026-08-01T01:52:56.666840Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2607.25648"},"observation_digest":"sha256:52f5543834cb62266ff8e2efb1cc6a9ba0624690f63c44b6a3e36cc90391da4d","observation_id":"087608a2-96ff-469a-9bdd-0e8c391224a5","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-08-01T01:52:56.666840Z","resolver_source":null,"status":"unresolved"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"reason":"canonical_work_link_unavailable","source_receipts":[],"state":"unavailable"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":null,"doi":null,"metadata_source":null,"pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-01T02:41:53.515878Z","title":"Chain-of-thought reasoning in the wild is not always faithful,","venue":null,"work_id":null,"year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2607.26102","last_updated":"2026-07-28T07:28:38Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-10T19:42:06.682388Z","submitted_at":"2026-07-28T07:28:38Z","title":"A Reference-Free Score for Detecting Silent Reasoning Failures in Large Language Models","version":1},"reference_index":22,"source":"pdf_text","source_observed_at":"2026-08-01T02:41:53.515878Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2607.26102"},"observation_digest":"sha256:65317a77112ac4622dc972b646eb1eb7679a6e3322277c91576de9c2dbacc04a","observation_id":"e7d0c5bc-7b1a-4d33-8a3a-a2e66e218315","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-08-01T02:41:53.515878Z","resolver_source":null,"status":"unresolved"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"reason":"canonical_work_link_unavailable","source_receipts":[],"state":"unavailable"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":null,"doi":null,"metadata_source":null,"pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-03T14:26:27.978746Z","title":"Chain-of- Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful , March 2025","venue":null,"work_id":null,"year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2607.29062","last_updated":"2026-07-31T06:30:45Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T20:37:39.222608Z","submitted_at":"2026-07-31T06:30:45Z","title":"On the Generalization of Steering Vectors for Chain-of-Thought Faithfulness","version":1},"reference_index":2,"source":"arxiv_source","source_observed_at":"2026-08-03T14:26:27.978746Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2607.29062"},"observation_digest":"sha256:de233de5ca8f3dde58c287cf55b19c5324d1d881494a97b117c73504ba1ef489","observation_id":"dfb39c0b-f025-446f-8f35-12f215f3da91","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-08-03T14:26:27.978746Z","resolver_source":null,"status":"unresolved"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"reason":"canonical_work_link_unavailable","source_receipts":[],"state":"unavailable"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":null,"doi":null,"metadata_source":null,"pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T00:13:47.033588Z","title":"Chain-of-thought reasoning in the wild is not always faithful.arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.08679, 2025","venue":null,"work_id":null,"year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2608.01755","last_updated":"2026-08-04T02:59:32Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-10T18:21:40.057029Z","submitted_at":"2026-08-03T06:24:36Z","title":"Deferred Exposure of Future Trajectories for Verifiable Reasoning in Autonomous Driving VLMs","version":2},"reference_index":1,"source":"pdf_text","source_observed_at":"2026-08-07T00:13:47.033588Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2608.01755"},"observation_digest":"sha256:168fb9e3b313dfd29111c4da0c55d7a67adfa8338b05400f9e36051404d0adf1","observation_id":"a5540de9-5ae7-4408-a903-f8736ba54a1b","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-08-07T00:13:47.033588Z","resolver_source":null,"status":"unresolved"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"reason":"canonical_work_link_unavailable","source_receipts":[],"state":"unavailable"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":null,"doi":null,"metadata_source":null,"pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-06T17:51:51.013543Z","title":"Chain-of-thought reasoning in the wild is not always faithful, 2025","venue":null,"work_id":null,"year":2025},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2608.04735","last_updated":"2026-08-05T11:59:20Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-10T15:47:03.566452Z","submitted_at":"2026-08-05T11:59:20Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Monitoring Can Be Unreliable in Implicit-Influence Settings","version":1},"reference_index":5,"source":"arxiv_source","source_observed_at":"2026-08-06T17:51:51.013543Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2608.04735"},"observation_digest":"sha256:c10af7df8a4ab5f487234221ea0480077ea069b02692b0af3a4a5f9e77210846","observation_id":"96f401f5-f452-466e-8c89-fc3e111287e3","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-08-06T17:51:51.013543Z","resolver_source":null,"status":"unresolved"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"reason":"canonical_work_link_unavailable","source_receipts":[],"state":"unavailable"}},{"citation":{"cited_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful","version":6},"cited_work":{"arxiv_id":null,"doi":null,"metadata_source":null,"pith_arxiv_id":"2503.08679","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-10T15:20:56.946510Z","title":"Chain-of-","venue":null,"work_id":null,"year":null},"citing_paper":{"arxiv_id":"2608.07077","last_updated":"2026-08-07T10:29:19Z","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-10T23:12:58.379719Z","submitted_at":"2026-08-07T10:29:19Z","title":"Transformers Struggle to Use Their Emergent World Models: Revisiting the Tower of Hanoi, and the Illusion of Thinking","version":1},"reference_index":29,"source":"arxiv_source","source_observed_at":"2026-08-10T15:20:56.946510Z"},"links":{"cited_paper":"/paper/2503.08679","citing_paper":"/paper/2608.07077"},"observation_digest":"sha256:f81e2eee0b1fe619a4f7a464b4e820226779cd5fac2a7d996b8ae82e6fc2fd8f","observation_id":"f6abacef-696b-4345-84ad-a1a670263898","resolution":{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T15:20:56.946510Z","resolver_source":null,"status":"unresolved"},"standing_notice":{"events":[],"reason":"canonical_work_link_unavailable","source_receipts":[],"state":"unavailable"}}],"links":{"evidence":"/evidence","html":"/paper/2503.08679/citation-record","integrity":"/paper/2503.08679/integrity","json":"/paper/2503.08679/citation-record.json","paper":"/paper/2503.08679"},"outbound":[],"paper":{"arxiv_id":"2503.08679","last_updated":"2026-06-16T17:36:22Z","latest_version":6,"primary_category":"cs.AI","snapshot_observed_at":"2026-08-07T17:12:11.913580Z","submitted_at":"2025-03-11T17:56:30Z","title":"Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful"},"reference_resolution":{"displayed":0,"state_counts":{"malformed_identifier":0,"metadata_mismatch":0,"parse_uncertain":0,"unresolved":0,"verified_exact":0,"verified_fuzzy":0},"total_outbound_references":0},"refusal":"A citation records a reference. It does not transfer a finding from one paper to another.","schema":"pith.paper-citation-record.v1","standing_sources":[{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:31:04.303077+00:00","source":"crossref"},{"observed_at":"2026-08-10T06:30:57.382061+00:00","source":"retraction_watch"}],"thesis":"As of 10 August 2026, this Paper Citation Record lists 0 of 0 outbound references and 67 inbound Pith citation observations for arXiv:2503.08679."}