THOUGHTTERMINATOR: Benchmarking, Calibrating, and Mitigating Overthinking in Reasoning Models
Fuente:
arXiv
Guardado en:
| Autores principales: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | Preprint |
| Publicado: |
2025
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| _version_ | 1866910913959821312 |
|---|---|
| author | Pu, Xiao Saxon, Michael Hua, Wenyue Wang, William Yang |
| author_facet | Pu, Xiao Saxon, Michael Hua, Wenyue Wang, William Yang |
| contents | Reasoning models have demonstrated impressive performance on difficult tasks that traditional language models struggle at. However, many are plagued with the problem of overthinking--generating large amounts of unnecessary tokens which don't improve accuracy on a question. We introduce approximate measures of problem-level difficulty and demonstrate that a clear relationship between problem difficulty and optimal token spend exists, and evaluate how well calibrated a variety of reasoning models are in terms of efficiently allocating the optimal token count. We find that in general, reasoning models are poorly calibrated, particularly on easy problems. To evaluate calibration on easy questions we introduce DUMB500, a dataset of extremely easy math, reasoning, code, and task problems, and jointly evaluate reasoning model on these simple examples and extremely difficult examples from existing frontier benchmarks on the same task domain. Finally, we introduce THOUGHTTERMINATOR, a training-free black box decoding technique that significantly improves reasoning model calibration. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2504_13367 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2025 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | THOUGHTTERMINATOR: Benchmarking, Calibrating, and Mitigating Overthinking in Reasoning Models Pu, Xiao Saxon, Michael Hua, Wenyue Wang, William Yang Computation and Language Reasoning models have demonstrated impressive performance on difficult tasks that traditional language models struggle at. However, many are plagued with the problem of overthinking--generating large amounts of unnecessary tokens which don't improve accuracy on a question. We introduce approximate measures of problem-level difficulty and demonstrate that a clear relationship between problem difficulty and optimal token spend exists, and evaluate how well calibrated a variety of reasoning models are in terms of efficiently allocating the optimal token count. We find that in general, reasoning models are poorly calibrated, particularly on easy problems. To evaluate calibration on easy questions we introduce DUMB500, a dataset of extremely easy math, reasoning, code, and task problems, and jointly evaluate reasoning model on these simple examples and extremely difficult examples from existing frontier benchmarks on the same task domain. Finally, we introduce THOUGHTTERMINATOR, a training-free black box decoding technique that significantly improves reasoning model calibration. |
| title | THOUGHTTERMINATOR: Benchmarking, Calibrating, and Mitigating Overthinking in Reasoning Models |
| topic | Computation and Language |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2504.13367 |