Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

Do LLMs Really Think Step-by-step In Implicit Reasoning?

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

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

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

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

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2411.15862 v4 pith:66FTDGFS submitted 2024-11-24 cs.CL cs.AI

classification cs.CLcs.AI
keywords implicitintermediatellmsstepsreasoningwhenhoweverprompted
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

It has been well-known that Chain-of-Thought can remarkably enhance LLMs' performance on complex tasks. However, because it also introduces slower inference speeds and higher computational costs, many researches have attempted to use implicit CoT, which does not need LLMs to explicitly generate the intermediate steps. However, the invisible reasoning process leaves us a doubt that, can implicit CoT really be equal to explicit CoT? Therefore, in this study, we address this question through experiments. We probe the information of intermediate steps from the model's hidden states when it is either trained or prompted to perform implicit CoT. The results surprisingly indicate that when prompted, LLMs hardly think about intermediate steps, suggesting they may just rely on experience rather than strict step-by-step reasoning. But when trained, they indeed calculate intermediate steps. Moreover, in both situations, we find the effect of using implicit CoT is susceptible to the format of the problem, reaffirming the current deficiency of implicit CoT.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. Human Preference-Aligned Concept Customization Benchmark via Decomposed Evaluation

    cs.CV 2025-09 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    D-GPTScore, which averages GPT-4o's per-aspect ratings of concept-customized images, correlates with human preference at 0.78 Pearson on the new CC-AlignBench, beating prior metrics.

  2. A Survey on Latent Reasoning

    cs.CL 2025-07 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    A survey that organizes latent reasoning methods into vertical recurrence, horizontal recurrence, and infinite-depth diffusion, arguing that silent reasoning can beat explicit chain-of-thought.

Pith tools