Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 cited by

100 Days After DeepSeek-R1: A Survey on Replication Studies and More Directions for Reasoning 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

arxiv 2505.00551 v3 pith:XKVI3JTB submitted 2025-05-01 cs.CL

100 Days After DeepSeek-R1: A Survey on Replication Studies and More Directions for Reasoning Language Models

classification cs.CL
keywords modelsstudiesdeepseek-r1languagereplicationrlmsdatadetails
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

The recent development of reasoning language models (RLMs) represents a novel evolution in large language models. In particular, the recent release of DeepSeek-R1 has generated widespread social impact and sparked enthusiasm in the research community for exploring the explicit reasoning paradigm of language models. However, the implementation details of the released models have not been fully open-sourced by DeepSeek, including DeepSeek-R1-Zero, DeepSeek-R1, and the distilled small models. As a result, many replication studies have emerged aiming to reproduce the strong performance achieved by DeepSeek-R1, reaching comparable performance through similar training procedures and fully open-source data resources. These works have investigated feasible strategies for supervised fine-tuning (SFT) and reinforcement learning from verifiable rewards (RLVR), focusing on data preparation and method design, yielding various valuable insights. In this report, we provide a summary of recent replication studies to inspire future research. We primarily focus on SFT and RLVR as two main directions, introducing the details for data construction, method design and training procedure of current replication studies. Moreover, we conclude key findings from the implementation details and experimental results reported by these studies, anticipating to inspire future research. We also discuss additional techniques of enhancing RLMs, highlighting the potential of expanding the application scope of these models, and discussing the challenges in development. By this survey, we aim to help researchers and developers of RLMs stay updated with the latest advancements, and seek to inspire new ideas to further enhance RLMs.

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

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

  1. Different Teachers, Different Capabilities: Sub-1B On-Device Distillation for Structured Text Enrichment

    cs.AI 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0

    Distilling an 8B reasoning teacher into a 0.6B student recovers most summary quality at ~50× speed, but teacher type—not scale alone—determines which capabilities transfer.

  2. Forge: Quality-Aware Reinforcement Learning for NP-Hard Optimization in LLMs

    cs.AI 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    OPT-BENCH trains LLMs on NP-hard optimization via quality-aware RLVR, achieving 93.1% success rate and 46.6% quality ratio on Qwen2.5-7B while outperforming GPT-4o and transferring gains to other domains.

  3. Trust Region On-Policy Distillation

    cs.LG 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    TrOPD stabilizes on-policy distillation for LLMs with trust-region learning, outlier estimation, and off-policy guidance, outperforming prior OPD methods on reasoning and code benchmarks.

  4. Fine-grained Verification via Diagnostic Reasoning Supervision for Aspect Sentiment Triplet Extraction

    cs.CL 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    FiVeD adds a fine-grained verifier to ASTE systems, trained on multiple objectives including validity, quality scores, error types, and rationales from LLM rubrics, yielding up to 3.53 F1 gains across baselines.