# Incorporating Self-Rewriting into Large Language Model Reasoning Reinforcement

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2511.16331 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2511.16331/

## Key facts

- Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Reinforcement learning for reasoning, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning.
- Builds on 30 of its 45 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 20 Nov 2025.

## Placed in

- LLM reasoning / [Reinforcement learning for reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/lr/reinforcement-learning-for-reasoning/)

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

- [DeepSeekMath: Pushing the Limits of Mathematical Reasoning in Open Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.03300/) (2024)
- [DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.12948/) (2025)
- [Think you have Solved Question Answering? Try ARC, the AI2 Reasoning Challenge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1803.05457/) (2018)
- [DAPO: An Open-Source LLM Reinforcement Learning System at Scale](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.14476/) (2025)
- [Kimi k1.5: Scaling Reinforcement Learning with LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.12599/) (2025)
- [Training Large Language Models to Reason in a Continuous Latent Space](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.06769/) (2024)
- [Measuring Faithfulness in Chain-of-Thought Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.13702/) (2023)
- [Self-Rewarding Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.10020/) (2024)
- [Do NOT Think That Much for 2+3=? On the Overthinking of o1-Like LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.21187/) (2024)
- [L1: Controlling How Long A Reasoning Model Thinks With Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.04697/) (2025)
- [Towards Large Reasoning Models: A Survey of Reinforced Reasoning with Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.09686/) (2025)
- [DeepMath-103K: A Large-Scale, Challenging, Decontaminated, and Verifiable Mathematical Dataset for Advancing Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.11456/) (2025)
- [TTRL: Test-Time Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.16084/) (2025)
- [Training Language Models to Reason Efficiently](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.04463/) (2025)
- [CODI: Compressing Chain-of-Thought into Continuous Space via Self-Distillation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.21074/) (2025)
- [Meta-Rewarding Language Models: Self-Improving Alignment with LLM-as-a-Meta-Judge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.19594/) (2024)
- [Thoughts Are All Over the Place: On the Underthinking of o1-Like LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.18585/) (2025)
- [Seed1.5-Thinking: Advancing Superb Reasoning Models with Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.13914/) (2025)
- [Generative Reward Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.12832/) (2024)
- [AdaptThink: Reasoning Models Can Learn When to Think](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.13417/) (2025)
- [Right Question is Already Half the Answer: Fully Unsupervised LLM Reasoning Incentivization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.05812/) (2025)
- [Towards Thinking-Optimal Scaling of Test-Time Compute for LLM Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.18080/) (2025)
- [Between Underthinking and Overthinking: An Empirical Study of Reasoning Length and correctness in LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.00127/) (2025)
- [LightThinker: Thinking Step-by-Step Compression](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.15589/) (2025)
- [Self-Training Elicits Concise Reasoning in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.20122/) (2025)
- [S-GRPO: Early Exit via Reinforcement Learning in Reasoning Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.07686/) (2025)
- [ShorterBetter: Guiding Reasoning Models to Find Optimal Inference Length for Efficient Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.21370/) (2025)
- [An Empirical Study of LLM Reasoning Ability Under Strict Output Length Constraint](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.14350/) (2025)
- [General Intelligence Requires Reward-based Pretraining](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.19402/) (2025)
- [A Practical Two-Stage Recipe for Mathematical LLMs: Maximizing Accuracy with SFT and Efficiency with Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.08267/) (2025)

## Built on by (most cited first, 3 of 3)

- [Learning from Own Solutions: Self-Conditioned Credit Assignment for Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.18810/) (2026)
- [Hi-TTRL: Regulating Consensus with Hints for Test-Time Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.03545/) (2026)
- [VSPO: Vector-Steered Policy Optimization for Behavioral Control](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.15604/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Through reinforcement learning (RL) with outcome correctness rewards, large reasoning models (LRMs) with scaled inference computation have demonstrated substantial success on complex reasoning tasks. However, the one-sided reward, focused solely on final correctness, limits its ability to provide detailed supervision over internal reasoning process. This deficiency leads to suboptimal internal reasoning quality, manifesting as issues like over-thinking, under-thinking, redundant-thinking, and disordered-thinking. Inspired by the recent progress in LRM self-rewarding, we introduce self-rewriting framework, where a model rewrites its own reasoning texts, and subsequently learns from the rewritten reasoning to improve the internal thought process quality. For algorithm design, we propose a selective rewriting approach wherein only "simple" samples, defined by the model's consistent correctness, are rewritten, thereby preserving all original reward signals of GRPO. For practical implementation, we compile rewriting and vanilla generation within one single batch, maintaining the scalability of the RL algorithm and introducing only ~10% overhead. Extensive experiments on diverse tasks with different model sizes validate the effectiveness of self-rewriting. In terms of the accuracy-length tradeoff, the self-rewriting approach achieves improved accuracy (+0.6) with substantially shorter reasoning (-46%) even without explicit instructions in rewriting prompts to reduce reasoning length, outperforming existing strong baselines. In terms of internal reasoning quality, self-rewriting achieves significantly higher scores (+7.2) under the LLM-as-a-judge metric, successfully mitigating internal reasoning flaws.