Shuaiyi Nie Institute of Information Engineering, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Dingsiyu Baidu, Wenyuan Zhang, Linhao Yu, Tianmeng Yang ERNIE Team, Baidu, Yao Chen, Weichong Yin, Yu Sun Baidu 等 10 位作者
Large reasoning models trained with reinforcement learning and verifiable rewards (RLVR) achieve strong performance on complex reasoning tasks, yet often overthink, generating redundant reasoning without performance gains. Existing trajectory-level length penalties often fail to effectively shorten reasoning length and degrade accuracy, as they uniformly treat all reasoning steps and lack fine-grained signals to distinguish redundancy from necessity. Meanwhile, process-supervised methods are typically resource-intensive and suffer from inaccurate credit assignment. To address these issues, we propose ATTNPO, a low-overhead process-supervised RL framework that leverages the model’s intrinsic attention signals for step-level credit assignment. We first identify a set of special attention heads that naturally focus on essential steps while suppressing redundant ones. By leveraging the attention scores of these heads, We then employ two sub-strategies to mitigate overthinking by discouraging redundant steps while preserving accuracy by reducing penalties on essential steps. Experimental results show that ATTNPO substantially reduces reasoning length while significantly improving performance across 9 benchmarks.
尚无 AI 解读，展示原文摘要
cs.CL
Proceedings of the 64th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) · 2026 · 正式发表
Jingting Zheng Tianjin University and Kunmimg University of Science and Technology, Yuqi Ren Tianjin University, Linhao Yu, Yongqi Leng, Deyi Xiong Tianjin University
Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in contexts requiring complex moral reasoning and value trade-offs. However, existing evaluations typically rely on item-level behavioral metrics, which fail to capture how models structurally prioritize competing values as a cohesive system. To address this, we propose a symmetric human-LLM evaluation framework, grounded in Q methodology, to measure value-structure alignment. Under our protocol, humans and models sort an identical 140-item moral statement set into a shared nine-column forced distribution; for LLMs, we elicit strict rankings and deterministically map them to Q-sort buckets. Using a human reference sample (N=35), we establish a stable three-factor reference geometry specific to this instrument and sample. We evaluate 12 LLMs across four model families via 240 replicated Q-sorts at two temperature settings, quantifying structural alignment via Procrustes similarity (\phi) and RSA-based Spearman correlation (\rho). Our results reveal significant cross-family heterogeneity, model-specific sensitivity to generation stochasticity and localized misalignment, which demonstrate that favorable global scores can obscure underlying regional distortions. While rank- and bucket-based analyses remain highly consistent, prompt phrasing introduces notable variance. Ultimately, assessing value-structure alignment provides a crucial structural complement to traditional itemwise moral benchmarks.
尚无 AI 解读，展示原文摘要
cs.CL
Proceedings of the 64th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) · 2026 · 正式发表