Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 cited by

What Do Learning Dynamics Reveal About Generalization in LLM 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 2411.07681 v2 pith:73B2XVZ6 submitted 2024-11-12 cs.LG

classification cs.LG
keywords trainingaccuracydatageneralizationmodelreasoninglearningmetric
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
abstract

Despite the remarkable capabilities of modern large language models (LLMs), the mechanisms behind their problem-solving abilities remain elusive. In this work, we aim to better understand how the learning dynamics of LLM finetuning shapes downstream generalization. Our analysis focuses on reasoning tasks, whose problem structure allows us to distinguish between memorization (the exact replication of reasoning steps from the training data) and performance (the correctness of the final solution). We find that a model's generalization behavior can be effectively characterized by a training metric we call pre-memorization train accuracy: the accuracy of model samples on training queries before they begin to copy the exact reasoning steps from the training set. On the dataset level, this metric is able to reliably predict test accuracy, achieving $R^2$ of around or exceeding 0.9 across various models (Llama3 8, Gemma2 9B), datasets (GSM8k, MATH), and training configurations. On a per-example level, this metric is also indicative of whether individual model predictions are robust to perturbations in the training query. By connecting a model's learning behavior to its generalization, pre-memorization train accuracy can guide targeted improvements to training strategies. We focus on data curation as an example, and show that prioritizing examples with low pre-memorization accuracy leads to 1.5-2x improvements in data efficiency compared to i.i.d. data scaling, and outperforms other standard data curation techniques.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

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

  1. Beyond the Sampled Token: Preserving Candidate Support in RLVR

    cs.AI 2025-10 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    SimKO, an asymmetric top-K token-level regularizer for RLVR, improves pass@K on math/logic benchmarks across K=1..256 without lowering pass@1 relative to GRPO.

  2. Are Large Language Models Reliable AI Scientists? Assessing Reverse-Engineering of Black-Box Systems

    cs.LG 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    LLMs struggle to use passive observations for reverse engineering, but active intervention improves performance, largely through the process of generating queries rather than the data obtained.

  3. Adaptive Multi-Agent Reasoning via Automated Workflow Generation

    cs.AI 2025-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Automated workflow generation and iterative prompt refinement let a standard GPT-4.1 model outperform state-of-the-art reasoning models on a revised riddle benchmark.

  4. Answer-Centric or Reasoning-Driven? Uncovering the Latent Memory Anchor in LLMs

    cs.CL 2025-06 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Across ten LLMs, masking the final answer inside a complete reasoning chain causes a 26.9-point accuracy drop, evidence that models anchor to answers, not reasoning templates.

Pith tools