# Limited Reasoning Space: The cage of long-horizon reasoning in LLMs

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.19281 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.19281/

## Key facts

- Cited by 3 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 52 of its 73 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 22 Feb 2026.

## Placed in

- LLM reasoning / [Test-time compute and efficient thinking](https://mlsanity.com/lr/test-time-compute-and-efficient-thinking/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 52)

- [Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2201.11903/) (2022)
- [Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.14168/) (2021)
- [Self-Consistency Improves Chain of Thought Reasoning in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.11171/) (2022)
- [Measuring Mathematical Problem Solving With the MATH Dataset](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.03874/) (2021)
- [On Calibration of Modern Neural Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1706.04599/) (2017)
- [Large Language Models are Zero-Shot Reasoners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.11916/) (2022)
- [Reflexion: Language Agents with Verbal Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.11366/) (2023)
- [Let's Verify Step by Step](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.20050/) (2023)
- [Self-Refine: Iterative Refinement with Self-Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.17651/) (2023)
- [Tree of Thoughts: Deliberate Problem Solving with Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.10601/) (2023)
- [Scaling LLM Test-Time Compute Optimally can be More Effective than Scaling Model Parameters](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.03314/) (2024)
- [RULER: What's the Real Context Size of Your Long-Context Language Models?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.06654/) (2024)
- [Graph of Thoughts: Solving Elaborate Problems with Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.09687/) (2023)
- [Faith and Fate: Limits of Transformers on Compositionality](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.18654/) (2023)
- [Towards Reasoning Era: A Survey of Long Chain-of-Thought for Reasoning Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.09567/) (2025)
- [Hallucination is Inevitable: An Innate Limitation of Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.11817/) (2024)
- [Chain-of-Verification Reduces Hallucination in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.11495/) (2023)
- [On the Planning Abilities of Large Language Models : A Critical Investigation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.15771/) (2023)
- [Omni-MATH: A Universal Olympiad Level Mathematic Benchmark For Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.07985/) (2024)
- [Reasoning with Exploration: An Entropy Perspective](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.14758/) (2025)
- [CoT-Valve: Length-Compressible Chain-of-Thought Tuning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.09601/) (2025)
- [The pitfalls of next-token prediction](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.06963/) (2024)
- [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)
- [Don't Overthink it. Preferring Shorter Thinking Chains for Improved LLM Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.17813/) (2025)
- [Can Prompt Difficulty be Online Predicted for Accelerating RL Finetuning of Reasoning Models?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.04632/) (2025)
- [Demystifying Reasoning Dynamics with Mutual Information: Thinking Tokens are Information Peaks in LLM Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.02867/) (2025)
- [Inverse Scaling in Test-Time Compute](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.14417/) (2025)
- [ParaThinker: Native Parallel Thinking as a New Paradigm to Scale LLM Test-time Compute](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.04475/) (2025)
- [DynaPrompt: Dynamic Test-Time Prompt Tuning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.16404/) (2025)

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

- [State commitment learning: training language models to distinguish computation from memory](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.05201/) (2026)
- [ThinkReset: Learnable Intermediate Interface Construction for Bounded-Context Long-Horizon Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.28642/) (2026)
- [ChronoVision: Temporal Reasoning via Latent State Reconstruction](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.05631/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

The test-time compute strategy, such as Chain-of-Thought (CoT), has significantly enhanced the ability of large language models to solve complex tasks like logical reasoning. However, empirical studies indicate that simply increasing the compute budget can sometimes lead to a collapse in test-time performance when employing typical task decomposition strategies such as CoT. This work hypothesizes that reasoning failures with larger compute budgets stem from static planning methods, which hardly perceive the intrinsic boundaries of LLM reasoning. We term it as the Limited Reasoning Space hypothesis and perform theoretical analysis through the lens of a non-autonomous stochastic dynamical system. This insight suggests that there is an optimal range for compute budgets; over-planning can lead to redundant feedback and may even impair reasoning capabilities. To exploit the compute-scaling benefits and suppress over-planning, this work proposes Halo, a model predictive control framework for LLM planning. Halo is designed for long-horizon tasks with reason-based planning and crafts an entropy-driven dual controller, which adopts a Measure-then-Plan strategy to achieve controllable reasoning. Experimental results demonstrate that Halo outperforms static baselines on complex long-horizon tasks by dynamically regulating planning at the reasoning boundary.