跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail
← 研踪 PaperTrail

arXiv:2611.16961 · v1

The Value of Thinking: Learning When to Reason in Hybrid Decision Models

首次提交 2026-11-12 23:32
版本更新 2026-11-12 23:32
雷达观测 2026-11-13 14:15
arXiv ↗PDF ↗

摘要

Existing adaptive-reasoning methods shorten the explicit reasoning a model writes, or skip it by switching modes; either way the answer is still written out token by token. \emph{Rather than deciding how much to think}, we explore a different paradigm, \emph{zero-or-TT thinking}: a single model either answers from the implicit thinking inside one forward pass, generating no token, or performs full autoregressive reasoning at a cost of TT tokens when that is worth paying. We realise it in a \emph{hybrid decision model} (HDM), where one frozen backbone serves both modes and a lightweight \emph{self-routing block} chooses between them. The block estimates the \emph{value of thinking}, the utility the slow mode is expected to add over the fast one, from what that implicit thinking has already produced, and the slow mode runs only where that value exceeds a price λλ set per request. Where no per-decision label exists, as in episodic agentic tasks, we introduce \emph{Calibrated Decision Policy Optimisation} (CDPO), a reinforcement-learning recipe that trains the block from episode-level returns. We evaluate HDM on MMLU-Pro, AGIEval, GPQA-Diamond, JevBench, BANKING77 and MiniWoB. Specifically, on JevBench HDM-4B scores 0.8570.857 against Jev's 0.8510.851 (+0.7%+0.7\%) at a median 0.1790.179\,s against 0.6520.652 (−72.5%-72.5\%). On the agentic venue MiniWoB HDM-27B cuts token cost by 80.1%80.1\%.

作者备注:20 pages, 3 figures

AI 论文解读

基于摘要 · 非全文审阅

此版本尚未生成 AI 解读。解读由后台任务生成并按论文版本保存,登录后共享已有结果。

版本差异

目前只收录了一个版本。收录下一版后,可以对照标题、作者、分类和摘要。

观测到的版本

相邻记录可能跳过中间版本;首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。

v1 · 2026-11-12 23:32 · 最新观测版本

The Value of Thinking: Learning When to Reason in Hybrid Decision Models

Existing adaptive-reasoning methods shorten the explicit reasoning a model writes, or skip it by switching modes; either way the answer is still written out token by token. \emph{Rather than deciding how much to think}, we explore a different paradigm, \emph{zero-or-TT thinking}: a single model either answers from the implicit thinking inside one forward pass, generating no token, or performs full autoregressive reasoning at a cost of TT tokens when that is worth paying. We realise it in a \emph{hybrid decision model} (HDM), where one frozen backbone serves both modes and a lightweight \emph{self-routing block} chooses between them. The block estimates the \emph{value of thinking}, the utility the slow mode is expected to add over the fast one, from what that implicit thinking has already produced, and the slow mode runs only where that value exceeds a price λλ set per request. Where no per-decision label exists, as in episodic agentic tasks, we introduce \emph{Calibrated Decision Policy Optimisation} (CDPO), a reinforcement-learning recipe that trains the block from episode-level returns. We evaluate HDM on MMLU-Pro, AGIEval, GPQA-Diamond, JevBench, BANKING77 and MiniWoB. Specifically, on JevBench HDM-4B scores 0.8570.857 against Jev's 0.8510.851 (+0.7%+0.7\%) at a median 0.1790.179\,s against 0.6520.652 (−72.5%-72.5\%). On the agentic venue MiniWoB HDM-27B cuts token cost by 80.1%80.1\%.

查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗