Think Right: Learning to Mitigate Under-Over Thinking via Adaptive, Attentive Compression
Recent thinking models solve complex reasoning tasks by scaling test-time compute, but this scaling must be allocated in line with task difficulty. On one hand, short reasoning (underthinking) leads to errors on harder problems that require extended reasoning steps; but, excessively long reasoning (overthinking) can be token-inefficient, generating unnecessary steps even after reaching a correct intermediate solution. We refer to this as under-adaptivity, where the model fails to modulate its response length appropriately given problems of varying difficulty. To address under-adaptivity and strike a balance between under- and overthinking, we propose TRAAC (Think Right with Adaptive, Attentive Compression), an online post-training RL method that leverages the model's self-attention over a long reasoning trajectory to identify important steps and prune redundant ones. TRAAC also estimates difficulty and incorporates it into training rewards, thereby learning to allocate reasoning budget commensurate with example difficulty. Our approach improves accuracy, reduces reasoning steps, and enables adaptive thinking compared to base models and other RL baselines. Across a variety of tasks (AIME, AMC, GPQA-D, BBEH), TRAAC (Qwen3-4B) achieves an average absolute accuracy gain of 8.4% with a relative reduction in reasoning length of 36.8% compared to the base model, and a 7.9% accuracy gain paired with a 29.4% length drop compared to the best RL baseline. TRAAC also shows strong generalization: although our models are trained on math datasets, they show accuracy and efficiency gains on out-of-distribution non-math datasets like GPQA-D, BBEH, and OptimalThinkingBench. Our analysis further verifies that TRAAC provides fine-grained adjustments to thinking budget based on difficulty and that a combination of task-difficulty calibration and attention-based compression yields gains across diverse tasks.
Code (0)
등록된 구현이 없습니다.
Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
Thinking Past the Answer: Evaluating Harmful Overthinking in Large Reasoning Models
Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) improve performance by generating explicit intermediate reasoning traces through increased test-time compute, yet the assumption that longer reasoning is consistently beneficial remains unde…
Shallow-Deep Networks: Understanding and Mitigating Network Overthinking
We characterize a prevalent weakness of deep neural networks (DNNs)---overthinking---which occurs when a DNN can reach correct predictions before its final layer. Overthinking is computationally wasteful, and it can also…
image-classificationImage ClassificationPredictionThinking Short and Right Over Thinking Long: Serving LLM Reasoning Efficiently and Accurately
Recent advances in test-time scaling suggest that Large Language Models (LLMs) can gain better capabilities by generating Chain-of-Thought reasoning (analogous to human thinking) to respond a given request, and meanwhile…
The Danger of Overthinking: Examining the Reasoning-Action Dilemma in Agentic Tasks
Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) represent a breakthrough in AI problem-solving capabilities, but their effectiveness in interactive environments can be limited. This paper introduces and analyzes overthinking in LRMs. A ph…
Efficient Reasoning with Balanced Thinking
Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) have shown remarkable reasoning capabilities, yet they often suffer from overthinking, expending redundant computational steps on simple problems, or underthinking, failing to explore suffic…
Question Answering