mlsanityData to 13 Oct 2026

Bridging the Know-Act Gap via Task-Level Autoregressive Reasoning

arXiv 2603.22619 ↗First posted 23 Mar 2026cs.AIcited by 0

On the map: LLM reasoning → Test-time compute and efficient thinking

also in 1 more
Abstract (arXiv)

LLMs often generate seemingly valid answers to flawed or ill-posed inputs. This is not due to missing knowledge: under discriminative prompting, the same models can mostly identify such issues, yet fail to reflect this in standard generative responses. This reveals a fundamental know-act gap between discriminative recognition and generative behavior. Prior work largely characterizes this issue in narrow settings, such as math word problems or question answering, with limited focus on how to integrate these two modes. In this work, we present a comprehensive analysis using FaultyScience, a newly constructed large-scale, cross-disciplinary benchmark of faulty scientific questions. We show that the gap is pervasive and stems from token-level autoregression, which entangles task selection (validate vs. answer) with content generation, preventing discriminative knowledge from being utilized. To address this, we propose DeIllusionLLM, a task-level autoregressive framework that explicitly models this decision. Through self-distillation, the model unifies discriminative judgment and generative reasoning within a single backbone. Empirically, DeIllusionLLM substantially reduces answer-despite-error failures under natural prompting while maintaining general reasoning performance, demonstrating that self-distillation is an effective and scalable solution for bridging the discriminative-generative know-act gap

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 13 Oct 2026). Placed in Test-time compute and efficient thinking, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 9 of its 23 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 23 Mar 2026.

Builds on

9 of 23 references.

References · 9

  1. 2023GPT-4 Technical Reportcited by 18,278
  2. 2023LLaMA: Open and Efficient Foundation Language Modelscited by 14,072
  3. 2024Qwen2.5 Technical Reportcited by 4,840
  4. 2018Know What You Don't Know: Unanswerable Questions for SQuADcited by 1,546
  5. 2024Benchmarking Hallucination in Large Language Models based on Unanswerable Math Word Problemcited by 42
  6. 2025Detecting (Un)answerability in Large Language Models with Linear Directionscited by 12
  7. 2024From Blind Solvers to Logical Thinkers: Benchmarking LLMs' Logical Integrity on Faulty Mathematical Problemscited by 8
  8. 2018U-Net: Machine Reading Comprehension with Unanswerable Questionscited by 5
  9. 2025Comparing Human Expertise and Large Language Models Embeddings in Content Validity Assessment of Personality Testscited by 1

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025The Reasoning-Memorization Interplay in Language Models Is Mediated by a Single Direction
  2. 2026Thinking to Recall: How Reasoning Unlocks Parametric Knowledge in LLMs
  3. 2026Emergent Search and Backtracking in Latent Reasoning Models
  4. 2025Answer-Centric or Reasoning-Driven? Uncovering the Latent Memory Anchor in LLMs
  5. 2025Unbiased Reasoning for Knowledge-Intensive Tasks in Large Language Models via Conditional Front-Door Adjustment
  6. 2026Automated Benchmark Generation from Domain Guidelines Informed by Bloom's Taxonomy
  7. 2026Vernier: Probing Representational Misalignment Behind Lexical Gaps in Causal Reasoning
  8. 2024KCIF: Knowledge-Conditioned Instruction Following