Multimodal large reasoning models often rely on long Chain-of-Thought (CoT) traces in which a substantial fraction of tokens, such as repeated visual descriptions, self-reflection, and other visually-disengaged filler, inflate inference cost without contributing to the answer. Existing CoT compression methods optimize output length but never measure whether a reasoning token is actually grounded in the image. We propose \textbf{VIG} (Visual Information Gain), an information-theoretic GRPO reward that scores each reasoning token by how much the image reduces its predictive uncertainty. VIG is computed online from two forward passes of the same policy, one with and one without the image, so no reference chains, external annotations, or auxiliary reward models are needed. Across six main multimodal reasoning benchmarks and three Qwen3-VL-Thinking model sizes (2B/4B/8B), plus an additional R1-Onevision-Bench evaluation on 8B, VIG consistently improves the accuracy--efficiency trade-off, supporting our central claim: \emph{efficient multimodal reasoning emerges from raising visual information density, where every reasoning token earns its place by anchoring to the image, rather than from imposing a length budget.} Our source code is available at https://github.com/chaser682/vig.
Linh Dieu Le, Tong Chen, Shazia Sadiq +3cs.IR cs.AI
Large language model-based recommender systems are increasingly adopting slow-thinking models that generate step-by-step reasoning before making predictions, often achieving higher accuracy than fast-thinking models that predict directly. However, their reasoning traces are often unnecessarily verbose, increasing inference costs without commensurate accuracy gains. Existing training-based approaches to reasoning compression often incur substantial adaptation costs, while inference-time methods are brittle and difficult to scale. These limitations motivate model merging as a promising training-free direction for transferring specialised behaviours between models in a shared parameter space. In particular, merging a slow-thinking model with a fast-thinking counterpart provides a natural mechanism for balancing recommendation accuracy and reasoning conciseness. To this end, we propose, to our knowledge, the first model merging framework for reasoning compression in recommender systems. Unlike conventional merging methods that apply uniform merge coefficients across model components, our method performs fine-grained merging at the level of individual attention heads, capturing heterogeneous patterns in recommendation reasoning. Each attention head is assigned a distinct merge coefficient according to its contribution to critical reasoning evidence and its sensitivity to parameter change, enabling selective injection of the concise behaviour of the fast-thinking model into the slow-thinking model and reducing reasoning verbosity without compromising recommendation quality. Experiments on three benchmark datasets show that our method reduces reasoning length by up to 24.3% while outperforming competitive model merging baselines in maintaining recommendation accuracy. The code is available at https://github.com/linhledieu/REAM.
Sara Candussio, Daniel Scalena, Luca Bortolussi +3cs.CL
Entropy-based pruning has been proposed as an effective method for compressing Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning with negligible accuracy loss. We test the robustness of low- and high-entropy CoT step selection methods across various models and reasoning tasks, showing that entropy offers no advantage over random pruning in any evaluated setting. Moving from sentences to tokens, we then show that retaining low-entropy tokens seems effective only on mathematical benchmarks. We find this is due to the inherently low-entropy nature of numeric tokens, which also convey semantic content in such problems. Finally, we demonstrate that patching a subset of a few CoT tokens with their original activations recovers near-perfect full-trace performance, providing causal evidence that task information is not concentrated in a small set of CoT tokens identifiable by heuristics, but rather distributed across the full reasoning chain.
Large language models (LLMs) achieve strong reasoning performance by allocating substantial computation at inference time, often generating long and verbose reasoning traces. While recent work on efficient reasoning reduces this overhead through length-based rewards or pruning, many approaches are post-trained under a much shorter context window than base-model training, a factor whose effect has not been systematically isolated. We first show that short-context post-training alone, using standard GRPO without any length-aware objective, already induces substantial reasoning compression-but at the cost of increasingly unstable training dynamics and accuracy degradation. To address this, we propose Step-level Advantage Selection (SAS), which operates at the reasoning-step level and assigns a zero advantage to low-confidence steps in correct rollouts and to high-confidence steps in verifier-failed rollouts, where failures often arise from truncation or verifier issues rather than incorrect reasoning. Across diverse mathematical and general reasoning benchmarks, SAS improves average Pass@1 accuracy by 0.86 points over the strongest length-aware baseline while reducing average reasoning length by 16.3%, yielding a better accuracy-efficiency trade-off.