REVIEW 14 cited by
On the Hardness of Faithful Chain-of-Thought Reasoning in Large Language Models
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
On the Hardness of Faithful Chain-of-Thought Reasoning in Large Language Models
read the original abstract
As Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly being employed in real-world applications in critical domains such as healthcare, it is important to ensure that the Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning generated by these models faithfully captures their underlying behavior. While LLMs are known to generate CoT reasoning that is appealing to humans, prior studies have shown that these explanations do not accurately reflect the actual behavior of the underlying LLMs. In this work, we explore the promise of three broad approaches commonly employed to steer the behavior of LLMs to enhance the faithfulness of the CoT reasoning generated by LLMs: in-context learning, fine-tuning, and activation editing. Specifically, we introduce novel strategies for in-context learning, fine-tuning, and activation editing aimed at improving the faithfulness of the CoT reasoning. We then carry out extensive empirical analyses with multiple benchmark datasets to explore the promise of these strategies. Our analyses indicate that these strategies offer limited success in improving the faithfulness of the CoT reasoning, with only slight performance enhancements in controlled scenarios. Activation editing demonstrated minimal success, while fine-tuning and in-context learning achieved marginal improvements that failed to generalize across diverse reasoning and truthful question-answering benchmarks. In summary, our work underscores the inherent difficulty in eliciting faithful CoT reasoning from LLMs, suggesting that the current array of approaches may not be sufficient to address this complex challenge.
Forward citations
Cited by 14 Pith papers
-
Forecasting Future Behavior as a Learning Task
Behavior Forecasters trained on LRM trajectories outperform larger models in predicting repeatability and input sensitivity at low cost.
-
Graph-Native Reinforcement Learning Enables Traceable Scientific Hypothesis Generation through Conceptual Recombination
Graph-PRefLexOR fine-tunes graph-native models with GRPO to organize reasoning into phases, yielding 40-65% gains in traceable hypothesis generation and 2-3x semantic diversity on 100 materials science questions.
-
To Isolate or to Score? Model-Adaptive Assessment for Cost-Efficient Multi-Agent RAG
Empirical study finds isolation drives gains for weak models in multi-agent RAG while scoring matters for strong ones, enabling MADARA for cost-efficient adaptive assessment.
-
Decodable but Not Faithful: Coupling Natural-Language Rationales to Programmatic Verifiers
Consistency training decodes verifier information from rationale representations but does not produce faithful natural-language explanations.
-
HANSEL: Extracting Breadcrumbs from Web Agent Trajectories for Interactive Verification
HANSEL extracts navigable evidence from agent trajectories with 83.7% precision and 88.8% recall on 45 tasks, reduces volume by 61.6%, and improves verification metrics in a 14-participant study.
-
Understanding and Mitigating Premature Confidence for Better LLM Reasoning
Premature confidence in LLM chains of thought predicts flawed reasoning and is mitigated by progressive confidence shaping, a label-free RL objective that yields accuracy gains on arithmetic, math, and science tasks.
-
When Reasoning Traces Become Performative: Step-Level Evidence that Chain-of-Thought Is an Imperfect Oversight Channel
CoT traces align with internal answer commitment in only 61.9% of steps on average, dominated by confabulated continuations after commitment has stabilized.
-
Decomposing and Steering Functional Metacognition in Large Language Models
LLMs have linearly decodable functional metacognitive states that causally modulate reasoning when steered via activation interventions.
-
Understanding Annotator Safety Policy with Interpretability
Annotator Policy Models learn safety policies from labeling behavior alone, accurately predicting responses and revealing sources of disagreement like policy ambiguity and value pluralism.
-
The Reasoning Trap: An Information-Theoretic Bound on Closed-System Multi-Step LLM Reasoning
Closed-system multi-step LLM reasoning is subject to an information-theoretic bound where mutual information with evidence decreases, preserving accuracy while eroding faithfulness, with EGSR recovering it on SciFact ...
-
Compared to What? Baselines and Metrics for Counterfactual Prompting
Counterfactual prompting effects on LLMs are often indistinguishable from those caused by meaning-preserving paraphrases, causing most previously reported demographic sensitivities to disappear under proper statistica...
-
Can Aha Moments Be Fake? Towards Quantifying Decorative and True Thinking in Chain-of-Thought
LLMs interleave true causal reasoning steps with decorative ones in CoT, with only ~2.3% of steps having high causal impact on AIME for Qwen-2.5, and a steering direction can force internal use of specific steps.
-
Reasoning emerges from constrained inference manifolds in large language models
Reasoning in LLMs emerges from inference dynamics forming constrained low-dimensional manifolds that preserve non-degenerate information volume, rather than from compression alone.
-
OpenAI o1 System Card
OpenAI reports that chain-of-thought reasoning in o1 models enables deliberative alignment, yielding state-of-the-art results on selected safety benchmarks for illicit advice, stereotypes, and jailbreaks.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.