The Self-Improvement Paradox: Can Language Models Bootstrap Reasoning Capabilities without External Scaffolding?
On the map: LLM reasoning → Test-time compute and efficient thinking
also in 1 more
Abstract (arXiv)
Self-improving large language models (LLMs) -- i.e., to improve the performance of an LLM by fine-tuning it with synthetic data generated by itself -- is a promising way to advance the capabilities of LLMs while avoiding extensive supervision. Existing approaches to self-improvement often rely on external supervision signals in the form of seed data and/or assistance from third-party models. This paper presents Crescent -- a simple yet effective framework for generating high-quality synthetic question-answer data in a fully autonomous manner. Crescent first elicits the LLM to generate raw questions via a bait prompt, then diversifies these questions leveraging a rejection sampling-based self-deduplication, and finally feeds the questions to the LLM and collects the corresponding answers by means of majority voting. We show that Crescent sheds light on the potential of true self-improvement with zero external supervision signals for math reasoning; in particular, Crescent-generated question-answer pairs suffice to (i) improve the reasoning capabilities of an LLM while preserving its general performance (especially in the 0-shot setting); and (ii) distil LLM knowledge to weaker models more effectively than existing methods based on seed-dataset augmentation.
Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Test-time compute and efficient thinking, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 3 of its 47 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 19 Feb 2025.
Builds on
3 of 47 references.
References · 3
- 2021Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problemscited by 10,109
- 2025DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via Reinforcement Learningcited by 6,330
- 2024The Faiss librarycited by 376
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 4; 2026: 3.
7 papers.
- 2025Beyond Majority Voting: Towards Fine-grained and More Reliable Reward Signal for Test-Time Reinforcement Learningcited by 13
- 2025Estimating problem difficulty without ground truth using Large Language Model comparisonscited by 4
- 2026Dynamo: Dynamic Skill-Tool Evolution for Vision-Language Agentscited by 2
- 2025Tuning without Peeking: Provable Generalization Bounds and Robust LLM Post-Trainingcited by 1
- 2025Meta-Learning Reinforcement Learning for Crypto-Return Predictioncited by 1
- 2026Talking to Yourself: Defying Forgetting in Large Language Modelscited by 1
- 2026Online Self-Calibration Against Hallucination in Vision-Language Modelscited by 0
- 2026Dynamo: Dynamic Skill-Tool Evolution for Vision-Language Agents29 Jun 2026
- 2026Online Self-Calibration Against Hallucination in Vision-Language Models1 May 2026
- 2026Talking to Yourself: Defying Forgetting in Large Language Models23 Jan 2026
- 2025Beyond Majority Voting: Towards Fine-grained and More Reliable Reward Signal for Test-Time Reinforcement Learning17 Dec 2025
- 2025Estimating problem difficulty without ground truth using Large Language Model comparisons16 Dec 2025
- 2025Meta-Learning Reinforcement Learning for Crypto-Return Prediction11 Sep 2025
- 2025Tuning without Peeking: Provable Generalization Bounds and Robust LLM Post-Training2 Jul 2025
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2022Large Language Models Can Self-Improve
- 2025Self-Questioning Language Models
- 2025A Model Can Help Itself: Reward-Free Self-Training for LLM Reasoning
- 2026Self-Verified Distillation: Your Language Model Is Secretly Its Own Synthetic Data Pipeline
- 2024Large Language Models Can Self-Improve in Long-context Reasoning
- 2025AgenticMath: Enhancing LLM Reasoning via Agentic-based Math Data Generation
- 2026Questioning the Questions: Sustaining Self-Evolution in Reasoning Models
- 2024Enhancing LLM Reasoning via Critique Models with Test-Time and Training-Time Supervision