While large reasoning models demonstrate strong performance on complex tasks, they lack the ability to adjust reasoning token usage based on task difficulty. This often leads to the "overthinking" problem -- excessive and unnecessary reasoning -- which, although potentially mitigated by human intervention to control the token budget, still fundamentally contradicts the goal of achieving fully autonomous AI. In this work, we propose Adaptive Reasoning Model (ARM), a reasoning model capable of adaptively selecting appropriate reasoning formats based on the task at hand. These formats include three efficient ones -- Direct Answer, Short CoT, and Code -- as well as a more elaborate format, Long CoT. To train ARM, we introduce Ada-GRPO, an adaptation of Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO), which addresses the format collapse issue in traditional GRPO. Ada-GRPO enables ARM to achieve high token efficiency, reducing tokens by an average of 30%, and up to 70%, while maintaining performance comparable to the model that relies solely on Long CoT. Furthermore, not only does it improve inference efficiency through reduced token generation, but it also brings a 2x speedup in training. In addition to the default Adaptive Mode, ARM supports two additional reasoning modes: 1) Instruction-Guided Mode, which allows users to explicitly specify the reasoning format via special tokens -- ideal when the appropriate format is known for a batch of tasks. 2) Consensus-Guided Mode, which aggregates the outputs of the three efficient formats and resorts to Long CoT in case of disagreement, prioritizing performance with higher token usage.

Recently, the development of large language models (LLMs) and reasoning large language models (RLLMs) have gained considerable attention from many researchers. RLLMs enhance the reasoning capabilities of LLMs through Long Chain-of-Thought (Long CoT) processes, significantly improving the performance of LLMs in addressing complex problems. However, there are few works that systematically explore what methods can fully unlock the performance of LLMs and RLLMs within the financial domain. To investigate the impact of various methods on LLMs and RLLMs, we utilize five LLMs and three RLLMs to assess the effects of prompting methods, agentic frameworks, and multilingual alignment methods on financial question-answering tasks. Our research findings indicate: (1) Current prompting methods and agent frameworks enhance the performance of LLMs in financial question answering by simulating Long CoT; (2) RLLMs possess inherent Long CoT capabilities, which limits the effectiveness of conventional methods in further enhancing their performance; (3) Current advanced multilingual alignment methods primarily improve the multilingual performance of LLMs by extending the reasoning length, which yields minimal benefits for RLLMs. Additionally, we discuss strategies for enhancing the performance of LLMs and RLLMs in financial question answering, which may serve as a inspiration for future improvements. We hope that this study can serve as an important reference for LLMs and RLLMs in the field of financial question answering. Recently, large language models (LLMs) have significantly advanced the field of natural language processing (NLP), and more and more researchers utilize LLMs to solve complex tasks in various domains (Zhou et al., 2023; Nie et al., 2024; Qin et al., 2024; Chang et al., 2024; Wang et al., 2025a).

With the rapid advancement of large reasoning models, long Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting has demonstrated strong performance on complex tasks. However, this often comes with a significant increase in token usage. In this paper, we conduct a comprehensive empirical analysis comparing long and short CoT strategies. Our findings reveal that while long CoT can lead to performance improvements, its benefits are often marginal relative to its significantly higher token consumption. Specifically, long CoT tends to outperform when ample generation budgets are available, whereas short CoT is more effective under tighter budget constraints. These insights underscore the need for a dynamic approach that selects the proper CoT strategy based on task context and resource availability. To address this, we propose SwitchCoT, an automatic framework that adaptively chooses between long and short CoT strategies to balance reasoning accuracy and computational efficiency. Moreover, SwitchCoT is designed to be budget-aware, making it broadly applicable across scenarios with varying resource constraints. Experimental results demonstrate that SwitchCoT can reduce inference costs by up to 50% while maintaining high accuracy. Notably, under limited token budgets, it achieves performance comparable to, or even exceeding, that of using either long or short CoT alone.

Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable reasoning capabilities in math and coding, often bolstered by post-training on the chain-of-thoughts (CoTs) generated by stronger models. However, existing strategies for curating such training data predominantly rely on heuristics, limiting generalizability and failing to capture subtleties underlying in data. To address these limitations, we leverage influence functions to systematically attribute LLMs' reasoning ability on math and coding to individual training examples, sequences, and tokens, enabling deeper insights into effective data characteristics. Our Influence-based Reasoning Attribution (Infra) uncovers nontrivial cross-domain effects across math and coding tasks: high-difficulty math examples improve both math and code reasoning, while low-difficulty code tasks most effectively benefit code reasoning. Based on these findings, we introduce a simple yet effective dataset reweighting strategy by flipping task difficulty, which doubles AIME24 accuracy from 10\% to 20\% and boosts LiveCodeBench accuracy from 33.8\% to 35.3\% for Qwen2.5-7B-Instruct. Moreover, our fine-grained attribution reveals that the sequence-level exploratory behaviors enhance reasoning performance in both math and code, and the token-level influence patterns are distinct for math and code reasoning: the former prefers natural language logic connectors and the latter emphasizes structural syntax.

Compressing long chain-of-thought (CoT) from large language models (LLMs) is an emerging strategy to improve the reasoning efficiency of LLMs. Despite its promising benefits, existing studies equally compress all thoughts within a long CoT, hindering more concise and effective reasoning. To this end, we first investigate the importance of different thoughts by examining their effectiveness and efficiency in contributing to reasoning through automatic long CoT chunking and Monte Carlo rollouts. Building upon the insights, we propose a theoretically bounded metric to jointly measure the effectiveness and efficiency of different thoughts. We then propose Long$\otimes$Short, an efficient reasoning framework that enables two LLMs to collaboratively solve the problem: a long-thought LLM for more effectively generating important thoughts, while a short-thought LLM for efficiently generating remaining thoughts. Specifically, we begin by synthesizing a small amount of cold-start data to fine-tune LLMs for long-thought and short-thought reasoning styles, respectively. Furthermore, we propose a synergizing-oriented multi-turn reinforcement learning, focusing on the model self-evolution and collaboration between long-thought and short-thought LLMs. Experimental results show that our method enables Qwen2.5-7B and Llama3.1-8B to achieve comparable performance compared to DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-7B and DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Llama-8B, while reducing token length by over 80% across the MATH500, AIME24/25, AMC23, and GPQA Diamond benchmarks. Our data and code are available at https://github.com/usail-hkust/LongShort.

The table reasoning task, crucial for efficient data acquisition, aims to answer questions based on the given table. Recently, reasoning large language models (RLLMs) with Long Chain-of-Thought (Long CoT) significantly enhance reasoning capabilities, leading to brilliant performance on table reasoning. However, Long CoT suffers from high cost for training and exhibits low reliability due to table content hallucinations. Therefore, we propose Row-of-Thought (RoT), which performs iteratively row-wise table traversal, allowing for reasoning extension and reflection-based refinement at each traversal. Scaling reasoning length by row-wise traversal and leveraging reflection capabilities of LLMs, RoT is training-free. The sequential traversal encourages greater attention to the table, thus reducing hallucinations. Experiments show that RoT, using non-reasoning models, outperforms RLLMs by an average of 4.3%, and achieves state-of-the-art results on WikiTableQuestions and TableBench with comparable models, proving its effectiveness. Also, RoT outperforms Long CoT with fewer reasoning tokens, indicating higher efficiency.

Recent advancements in large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable reasoning capabilities through long chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning. The R1 distillation scheme has emerged as a promising approach for training cost-effective models with enhanced reasoning abilities. However, the underlying mechanisms driving its effectiveness remain unclear. This study examines the universality of distillation data and identifies key components that enable the efficient transfer of long-chain reasoning capabilities in LLM distillation. Our findings reveal that the effectiveness of long CoT reasoning distillation from teacher models like Qwen-QwQ degrades significantly on nonhomologous models, challenging the assumed universality of current distillation methods. To gain deeper insights into the structure and patterns of long CoT reasoning, we propose DLCoT (Deconstructing Long Chain-of-Thought), a distillation data enhancement framework. DLCoT consists of three key steps: (1) data segmentation to decompose complex long CoT structures, (2) simplification by eliminating unsolvable and redundant solutions, and (3) optimization of intermediate error states. Our approach significantly improves model performance and token efficiency, facilitating the development of high-performance LLMs.

Solving mathematical problems using computer-verifiable languages like Lean has significantly impacted mathematical and computer science communities. State-of-the-art methods utilize single Large Language Models (LLMs) as agents or provers to either generate complete proof or perform tree searches. However, single-agent methods inherently lack a structured way to combine high-level reasoning in Natural Language (NL) with Formal Language (FL) verification feedback. To solve these issues, we propose MA-LoT: Multi-Agent Lean-based Long Chain-of-Thought framework, (to the best of our knowledge), the first multi-agent framework for Lean4 theorem proving that balance high-level NL reasoning and FL verification in Long CoT. Using this structured interaction, our approach enables deeper insights and long-term coherence in proof generation, with which past methods struggle. We do this by leveraging emergent formal reasoning ability in Long CoT using our novel LoT-Transfer Learning training-inference pipeline. Extensive experiments show that our framework achieves a 61.07% accuracy rate on the Lean4 version of the MiniF2F-Test dataset, largely outperforming GPT-4 (22.95%), single-agent tree search (InternLM-Step-Prover, 50.70%), and whole-proof generation (Godel-Prover, 55.33%) baselines. Furthermore, our findings highlight the potential of combining Long CoT with formal verification for a more insightful generation in a broader perspective.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have displayed astonishing abilities in various tasks, especially in text generation, classification, question answering, etc. However, the reasoning ability of LLMs still faces many debates. The inherent ambiguity of Natural Language (NL) limits LLMs' ability to perform verifiable reasoning, making its answers lack coherence and trustworthy support. To tackle the above problems, we propose a novel framework named FANS: Formal ANswer Selection for Natural Language Math Reasoning Using Lean4. To the best of our knowledge, it is the first framework that utilizes Lean4 to enhance LLMs' NL math reasoning ability. In particular, given an NL math question and LLM-generated answers, FANS first translates it into Lean4 theorem statements. Then it tries to prove it using a Lean4 prover and verify it by Lean4. Finally, it uses the FL result to assist in answer selection. It enhances LLMs' NL math ability in providing a computer-verifiable solution for its correct answer and proposes an alternative method for answer selection beyond the reward model. Extensive experiments indicate the effectiveness of our framework. It can improve the accuracy rate of reward model enhanced LLMs in the MATH-500 dataset by at most 1.91% and AMC-23 by at most 8.33% on strong reward-model baselines. In some particular fields like number theory that Lean4 experts in, we can even select all correct solutions. The qualitative analysis also shows our framework can make NL results formally backed by Lean4 proofs. As a pioneering work in the corresponding field, we will open-source all our models and datasets to further boost the development of the field.

Recently, o1-like models have drawn significant attention, where these models produce the long Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning steps to improve the reasoning abilities of existing Large Language Models (LLMs). In this paper, to understand the qualities of these long CoTs and measure the critique abilities of existing LLMs on these long CoTs, we introduce the DeltaBench, including the generated long CoTs from different o1-like models (e.g., QwQ, DeepSeek-R1) for different reasoning tasks (e.g., Math, Code, General Reasoning), to measure the ability to detect errors in long CoT reasoning. Based on DeltaBench, we first perform fine-grained analysis of the generated long CoTs to discover the effectiveness and efficiency of different o1-like models. Then, we conduct extensive evaluations of existing process reward models (PRMs) and critic models to detect the errors of each annotated process, which aims to investigate the boundaries and limitations of existing PRMs and critic models. Finally, we hope that DeltaBench could guide developers to better understand the long CoT reasoning abilities of their models.