# Does More Inference-Time Compute Really Help Robustness?

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2507.15974 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.15974/

## Key facts

- Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Reasoning for agents, planning and code, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning.
- Builds on 32 of its 48 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 21 Jul 2025.

## Placed in

- LLM reasoning / [Reasoning for agents, planning and code](https://mlsanity.com/lr/reasoning-for-agents-planning-and-code/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 32)

- [Qwen3 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.09388/) (2025)
- [DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.12948/) (2025)
- [Let's Verify Step by Step](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.20050/) (2023)
- [Training a Helpful and Harmless Assistant with Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2204.05862/) (2022)
- [Scaling LLM Test-Time Compute Optimally can be More Effective than Scaling Model Parameters](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.03314/) (2024)
- [s1: Simple test-time scaling](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.19393/) (2025)
- [OpenAI o1 System Card](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.16720/) (2024)
- [Large Language Monkeys: Scaling Inference Compute with Repeated Sampling](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.21787/) (2024)
- [Language Agent Tree Search Unifies Reasoning Acting and Planning in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.04406/) (2023)
- [The Instruction Hierarchy: Training LLMs to Prioritize Privileged Instructions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.13208/) (2024)
- [L1: Controlling How Long A Reasoning Model Thinks With Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.04697/) (2025)
- [Deliberative Alignment: Reasoning Enables Safer Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.16339/) (2024)
- [Inference Scaling Laws: An Empirical Analysis of Compute-Optimal Inference for Problem-Solving with Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.00724/) (2024)
- [ToRA: A Tool-Integrated Reasoning Agent for Mathematical Problem Solving](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.17452/) (2023)
- [SORRY-Bench: Systematically Evaluating Large Language Model Safety Refusal](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.14598/) (2024)
- [Phi-4-reasoning Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.21318/) (2025)
- [From Decoding to Meta-Generation: Inference-time Algorithms for Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.16838/) (2024)
- [SafeChain: Safety of Language Models with Long Chain-of-Thought Reasoning Capabilities](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.12025/) (2025)
- [Theoretical guarantees on the best-of-n alignment policy](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.01879/) (2024)
- [H-CoT: Hijacking the Chain-of-Thought Safety Reasoning Mechanism to Jailbreak Large Reasoning Models, Including OpenAI o1/o3, DeepSeek-R1, and Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.12893/) (2025)
- [DeepSeek-R1 Thoughtology: Let's think about LLM Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.07128/) (2025)
- [The Hidden Risks of Large Reasoning Models: A Safety Assessment of R1](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.12659/) (2025)
- [STAIR: Improving Safety Alignment with Introspective Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.02384/) (2025)
- [STAR-1: Safer Alignment of Reasoning LLMs with 1K Data](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.01903/) (2025)
- [Effectively Controlling Reasoning Models through Thinking Intervention](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.24370/) (2025)
- [Safety in Large Reasoning Models: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.17704/) (2025)
- [Trading Inference-Time Compute for Adversarial Robustness](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.18841/) (2025)
- [RealSafe-R1: Safety-Aligned DeepSeek-R1 without Compromising Reasoning Capability](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.10081/) (2025)
- [START: Self-taught Reasoner with Tools](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.04625/) (2025)
- [A Mousetrap: Fooling Large Reasoning Models for Jailbreak with Chain of Iterative Chaos](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.15806/) (2025)

## Built on by (most cited first, 2 of 2)

- [Get RICH or Die Scaling: Profitably Trading Inference Compute for Robustness](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.06790/) (2025)
- [Adaptive Probe-based Steering for Robust LLM Jailbreaking](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.20286/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Recently, Zaremba et al. demonstrated that increasing inference-time computation improves robustness in large proprietary reasoning LLMs. In this paper, we first show that smaller-scale, open-source models (e.g., DeepSeek R1, Qwen3, Phi-reasoning) can also benefit from inference-time scaling using a simple budget forcing strategy. More importantly, we reveal and critically examine an implicit assumption in prior work: intermediate reasoning steps are hidden from adversaries. By relaxing this assumption, we identify an important security risk, intuitively motivated and empirically verified as an inverse scaling law: if intermediate reasoning steps become explicitly accessible, increased inference-time computation consistently reduces model robustness. Finally, we discuss practical scenarios where models with hidden reasoning chains are still vulnerable to attacks, such as models with tool-integrated reasoning and advanced reasoning extraction attacks. Our findings collectively demonstrate that the robustness benefits of inference-time scaling depend heavily on the adversarial setting and deployment context. We urge practitioners to carefully weigh these subtle trade-offs before applying inference-time scaling in security-sensitive, real-world applications.