Learning from Mistakes: Negative Reasoning Samples Enhance Out-of-Domain Generalization
On the map: LLM reasoning → Test-time compute and efficient thinking
Abstract (arXiv)
Supervised fine-tuning (SFT) on chain-of-thought (CoT) trajectories demonstrations is a common approach for enabling reasoning in large language models. Standard practices typically only retain trajectories with correct final answers (positives) while ignoring the rest (negatives). We argue that this paradigm discards substantial supervision and exacerbates overfitting, limiting out-of-domain (OOD) generalization. Specifically, we surprisingly find that incorporating negative trajectories into SFT yields substantial OOD generalization gains over positive-only training, as these trajectories often retain valid intermediate reasoning despite incorrect final answers. To understand this effect in depth, we systematically analyze data, training dynamics, and inference behavior, identifying 22 recurring patterns in negative chains that serve a dual role: they moderate loss descent to mitigate overfitting during training and boost policy entropy by 35.67% during inference to facilitate exploration. Motivated by these observations, we further propose Gain-based LOss Weighting (GLOW), an adaptive, sample-aware scheme that exploits such distinctive training dynamics by rescaling per-sample loss based on inter-epoch progress. Empirically, GLOW efficiently leverages unfiltered trajectories, yielding a 5.51% OOD gain over positive-only SFT on Qwen2.5-7B and boosting MMLU from 72.82% to 76.47% as an RL initialization.
Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Test-time compute and efficient thinking, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 38 of its 56 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 8 Jan 2026.
Builds on
38 of 56 references.
Closest ancestors · 1
Same direction, newest first
Other references · 37
- 2024DeepSeekMath: Pushing the Limits of Mathematical Reasoning in Open Language Modelscited by 8,851
- 2025Qwen3 Technical Reportcited by 8,195
- 2021Finetuned Language Models Are Zero-Shot Learnerscited by 3,747
- 2025Gemini 2.5: Pushing the Frontier with Advanced Reasoning, Multimodality, Long Context, and Next Generation Agentic Capabilitiescited by 3,655
- 2025DAPO: An Open-Source LLM Reinforcement Learning System at Scalecited by 2,678
- 2019Invariant Risk Minimizationcited by 1,832
- 2022Challenging BIG-Bench Tasks and Whether Chain-of-Thought Can Solve Themcited by 1,767
- 2024OlympiadBench: A Challenging Benchmark for Promoting AGI with Olympiad-Level Bilingual Multimodal Scientific Problemscited by 1,099
- 2022Measuring and Narrowing the Compositionality Gap in Language Modelscited by 1,054
- 2025Group Sequence Policy Optimizationcited by 788
- 2025SFT Memorizes, RL Generalizes: A Comparative Study of Foundation Model Post-trainingcited by 655
- 2023Orca: Progressive Learning from Complex Explanation Traces of GPT-4cited by 369
25 more
- 2024Large Language Models for Mathematical Reasoning: Progresses and Challengescited by 283
- 2025AIMO-2 Winning Solution: Building State-of-the-Art Mathematical Reasoning Models with OpenMathReasoning datasetcited by 165
- 2025The Surprising Effectiveness of Negative Reinforcement in LLM Reasoningcited by 158
- 2025LLMs Can Easily Learn to Reason from Demonstrations Structure, not content, is what matters!cited by 132
- 2025Does Math Reasoning Improve General LLM Capabilities? Understanding Transferability of LLM Reasoningcited by 101
- 2019HEAD-QA: A Healthcare Dataset for Complex Reasoningcited by 100
- 2023Learning From Mistakes Makes LLM Better Reasonercited by 97
- 2024Can LLMs Learn from Previous Mistakes? Investigating LLMs' Errors to Boost for Reasoningcited by 69
- 2024Learning From Failure: Integrating Negative Examples when Fine-tuning Large Language Models as Agentscited by 49
- 2025Can Large Language Models Detect Errors in Long Chain-of-Thought Reasoning?cited by 43
- 2025Is Chain-of-Thought Reasoning of LLMs a Mirage? A Data Distribution Lenscited by 42
- 2025NGRPO: Negative-enhanced Group Relative Policy Optimizationcited by 31
- 2024RobustFT: Robust Supervised Fine-tuning for Large Language Models under Noisy Responsecited by 24
- 2025LEMMA: Learning from Errors for MatheMatical Advancement in LLMscited by 20
- 2025FisherSFT: Data-Efficient Supervised Fine-Tuning of Language Models Using Information Gaincited by 14
- 2025Knowledge or Reasoning? A Close Look at How LLMs Think Across Domainscited by 14
- 2025General Intelligence Requires Reward-based Pretrainingcited by 12
- 2025No Need for Explanations: LLMs can implicitly learn from mistakes in-contextcited by 10
- 2024Semi-supervised Fine-tuning for Large Language Modelscited by 8
- 2025Selective Self-to-Supervised Fine-Tuning for Generalization in Large Language Modelscited by 8
- 2025Explore Data Left Behind in Reinforcement Learning for Reasoning Language Modelscited by 7
- 2025How much do LLMs learn from negative examples?cited by 6
- 2025Unearthing Gems from Stones: Policy Optimization with Negative Sample Augmentation for LLM Reasoningcited by 6
- 2025Decoupling Knowledge and Reasoning in LLMs: An Exploration Using Cognitive Dual-System Theorycited by 4
- 2025Self-Error-Instruct: Generalizing from Errors for LLMs Mathematical Reasoningcited by 2
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 5.
5 papers.
- 2026Not All Negative Samples Are Equal: LLMs Learn Better from Plausible Reasoningcited by 0
- 2026EAPO: Entropy-Driven Adaptive Positive-Negative Sample Weighting for Policy Optimization in Open-Ended QAcited by 0
- 2026The Quality-Utility Paradox: Why High-Reward Data Impairs Small Model Mathematical Reasoningcited by 0
- 2026AERA: Adaptive Evidence Residual Allocation for Efficient Test-Time Reasoningcited by 0
- 2026Question-Specific Knowledge Graphs for Efficient Visual Reasoningcited by 0
- 2026Question-Specific Knowledge Graphs for Efficient Visual Reasoning28 Sep 2026
- 2026AERA: Adaptive Evidence Residual Allocation for Efficient Test-Time Reasoning28 Aug 2026
- 2026The Quality-Utility Paradox: Why High-Reward Data Impairs Small Model Mathematical Reasoning15 Jun 2026
- 2026EAPO: Entropy-Driven Adaptive Positive-Negative Sample Weighting for Policy Optimization in Open-Ended QA27 May 2026
- 2026Not All Negative Samples Are Equal: LLMs Learn Better from Plausible Reasoning3 Feb 2026
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026On the Role of Reasoning Patterns in the Generalization Discrepancy of Long Chain-of-Thought Supervised Fine-Tuning
- 2026Rethinking Generalization in Reasoning SFT: A Conditional Analysis on Optimization, Data, and Model Capability
- 2025Hard Negative Sample-Augmented DPO Post-Training for Small Language Models
- 2026Data Repetition Beats Data Scaling in Long-CoT Supervised Fine-Tuning
- 2025Enhancing Large Language Model Reasoning via Selective Critical Token Fine-Tuning
- 2025Weight Ensembling Improves Reasoning in Language Models
- 2025Dissecting Long-Chain-of-Thought Reasoning Models: An Empirical Study
- 2025VCORE: Variance-Controlled Optimization-based Reweighting for Chain-of-Thought Supervision