Measuring and Mitigating Post-hoc Rationalization in Reverse Chain-of-Thought Generation
Reverse Chain-of-Thought Generation (RCG) synthesizes reasoning traces from query-answer pairs, but it risks producing post-hoc rationalizations: when models can see the answer during generation, a systematic train-inference mismatch arises, because the visible answer shapes reasoning trajectories in ways that students cannot replicate without answer access during inference. We formalize this mismatch through a three-level measurement hierarchy: lexical, trajectory, and probabilistic anchoring, which capture surface token overlap, per-token generation dependence on the answer, and total information transmission from trace to answer, respectively. We analyze semantic suppression, the intuitive mitigation strategy that instructs models to ignore the answer, and find that it is counterproductive: while it reduces lexical overlap, it paradoxically increases trajectory anchoring--the per-token dependence of the generation process on the forbidden answer--consistent with ironic monitoring. We attribute this failure to active monitoring of the forbidden answer, which inadvertently deepens process-level dependence on it. To break this cycle, we propose Structural Skeleton-guided Reasoning (SSR), whose core contribution is to replace answer suppression with structural decoupling: SSR first generates a response-abstracted functional skeleton designed to limit direct answer encoding and then uses it as a structural target for full trace generation. Experiments across open-ended reasoning benchmarks show that SSR consistently mitigates anchoring, and that Distilled SSR (SSR-D), a distillation variant that internalizes skeleton-guided reasoning from teacher-generated traces, achieves up to 10\% improvement over suppression baselines while mitigating out-of-distribution (OOD) degradation.
Code (0)
등록된 구현이 없습니다.
Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
Measuring the reliability of MCMC inference with bidirectional Monte Carlo
Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) is one of the main workhorses of probabilistic inference, but it is notoriously hard to measure the quality of approximate posterior samples. This challenge is particularly salient in blac…
Probabilistic ProgrammingWhen Chain of Thought is Necessary, Language Models Struggle to Evade Monitors
While chain-of-thought (CoT) monitoring is an appealing AI safety defense, recent work on "unfaithfulness" has cast doubt on its reliability. These findings highlight an important failure mode, particularly when CoT acts…
LEDOM: Reverse Language Model
Autoregressive language models are trained exclusively left-to-right. We explore the complementary factorization, training right-to-left at scale, and ask what reasoning patterns emerge when a model conditions on future …
GeoFaith: A Spatio-Temporal Dual View of Faithful Chain-of-Thought
Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning has advanced large language models (LLMs), but outcome-based supervision leads to pervasive post-hoc rationalization, producing plausible yet unfaithful reasoning chains. Most prior faith…
Reinforcement LearningSymbolic Chain-of-Thought Distillation: Small Models Can Also "Think" Step-by-Step
Chain-of-thought prompting (e.g., "Let's think step-by-step") primes large language models to verbalize rationalization for their predictions. While chain-of-thought can lead to dramatic performance gains, benefits appea…
Diversity