Measuring AI Reasoning: A Guide for Researchers
In this paper, we offer a guide for researchers on evaluating reasoning in language models, building the case that reasoning should be assessed through evidence of adaptive, multi-step search rather than final-answer accuracy alone. Under an evaluation-oriented definition, reasoning requires selecting intermediate steps and halting according to input-dependent conditions, which we formalize as a search-like procedure. We show that single forward passes in scalable architectures are structurally limited in their ability to realize such variable-depth computation, motivating intermediate decoding and externalized reasoning traces as appropriate evaluation interfaces. Central to our argument is that final-answer accuracy alone is an insufficient measure of reasoning, because it provides little ability to diagnose or debug the underlying processes that produce individual solutions in frontier models. We therefore argue for a shift toward process-based evaluation, in which reasoning is assessed through the faithfulness and validity of intermediate reasoning traces as first-class evaluation targets.
Code (0)
등록된 구현이 없습니다.
Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
A guide to the dataset explosion in QA, NLI, and commonsense reasoning
Question answering, natural language inference and commonsense reasoning are increasingly popular as general NLP system benchmarks, driving both modeling and dataset work. Only for question answering we already have over…
Natural Language InferenceQuestion AnsweringBenchmarks for Physical Reasoning AI
Physical reasoning is a crucial aspect in the development of general AI systems, given that human learning starts with interacting with the physical world before progressing to more complex concepts. Although researchers…
Language (Technology) is Power: A Critical Survey of "Bias" in NLP
We survey 146 papers analyzing "bias" in NLP systems, finding that their motivations are often vague, inconsistent, and lacking in normative reasoning, despite the fact that analyzing "bias" is an inherently normative pr…
Language (Technology) is Power: A Critical Survey of ``Bias'' in NLP
We survey 146 papers analyzing {``}bias{''} in NLP systems, finding that their motivations are often vague, inconsistent, and lacking in normative reasoning, despite the fact that analyzing {``}bias{''} is an inherently …
Retrieval-of-Thought: Efficient Reasoning via Reusing Thoughts
Large reasoning models improve accuracy by producing long reasoning traces, but this inflates latency and cost, motivating inference-time efficiency. We propose Retrieval-of-Thought (RoT), which reuses prior reasoning as…