Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

Can Large Language Models Detect Errors in Long Chain-of-Thought 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 2502.19361 v3 pith:HFJFYIJI submitted 2025-02-26 cs.CL

Can Large Language Models Detect Errors in Long Chain-of-Thought Reasoning?

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

Recently, o1-like models have drawn significant attention, where these models produce the long Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning steps to improve the reasoning abilities of existing Large Language Models (LLMs). In this paper, to understand the qualities of these long CoTs and measure the critique abilities of existing LLMs on these long CoTs, we introduce the DeltaBench, including the generated long CoTs from different o1-like models (e.g., QwQ, DeepSeek-R1) for different reasoning tasks (e.g., Math, Code, General Reasoning), to measure the ability to detect errors in long CoT reasoning. Based on DeltaBench, we first perform fine-grained analysis of the generated long CoTs to discover the effectiveness and efficiency of different o1-like models. Then, we conduct extensive evaluations of existing process reward models (PRMs) and critic models to detect the errors of each annotated process, which aims to investigate the boundaries and limitations of existing PRMs and critic models. Finally, we hope that DeltaBench could guide developers to better understand the long CoT reasoning abilities of their models.

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. Can Large Language Models Reason About Complex Execution Paths? An Empirical Study on Python

    cs.SE 2025-11 conditional novelty 6.0

    State-of-the-art LLMs solve over 60% of complex Python path constraints in test generation, but their path classification is unreliable, especially for infeasible paths.

  2. Towards Reasoning Era: A Survey of Long Chain-of-Thought for Reasoning Large Language Models

    cs.AI 2025-03 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    The paper unifies perspectives on Long CoT in reasoning LLMs by introducing a taxonomy, detailing characteristics of deep reasoning and reflection, and discussing emergence phenomena and future directions.

  3. The Periodic Table of LLM Reasoning: A Structured Survey of Reasoning Paradigms, Methods, and Failure Modes

    cs.CL 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    A literature survey that introduces a taxonomy for LLM reasoning paradigms, analyzes methodological trends, and synthesizes failure modes from over 300 papers.