# Shorter, but Still Trustworthy? An Empirical Study of Chain-of-Thought Compression

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.04120 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.04120/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Test-time compute and efficient thinking, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning.
- Builds on 23 of its 29 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 5 Apr 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, 23 of 23)

- [The Llama 3 Herd of Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.21783/) (2024)
- [Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2201.11903/) (2022)
- [Qwen3 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.09388/) (2025)
- [Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward Model](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.18290/) (2023)
- [LlamaFactory: Unified Efficient Fine-Tuning of 100+ Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.13372/) (2024)
- [HarmBench: A Standardized Evaluation Framework for Automated Red Teaming and Robust Refusal](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.04249/) (2024)
- [Fine-tuning Aligned Language Models Compromises Safety, Even When Users Do Not Intend To!](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.03693/) (2023)
- [DecodingTrust: A Comprehensive Assessment of Trustworthiness in GPT Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.11698/) (2023)
- [Stop Overthinking: A Survey on Efficient Reasoning for Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.16419/) (2025)
- [AgentHarm: A Benchmark for Measuring Harmfulness of LLM Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.09024/) (2024)
- [UltraFeedback: Boosting Language Models with Scaled AI Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.01377/) (2023)
- [L1: Controlling How Long A Reasoning Model Thinks With Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.04697/) (2025)
- [Understanding Dataset Difficulty with V-Usable Information](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.08420/) (2021)
- [TrustLLM: Trustworthiness in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.05561/) (2024)
- [O1-Pruner: Length-Harmonizing Fine-Tuning for O1-Like Reasoning Pruning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.12570/) (2025)
- [TokenSkip: Controllable Chain-of-Thought Compression in LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.12067/) (2025)
- [Assessing the Brittleness of Safety Alignment via Pruning and Low-Rank Modifications](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.05162/) (2024)
- [Thinkless: LLM Learns When to Think](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.13379/) (2025)
- [FaithEval: Can Your Language Model Stay Faithful to Context, Even If "The Moon is Made of Marshmallows"](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.03727/) (2024)
- [MMLU-ProX: A Multilingual Benchmark for Advanced Large Language Model Evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.10497/) (2025)
- [Unlocking Efficient Long-to-Short LLM Reasoning with Model Merging](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.20641/) (2025)
- [Decoding Compressed Trust: Scrutinizing the Trustworthiness of Efficient LLMs Under Compression](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.15447/) (2024)
- [VeriThinker: Learning to Verify Makes Reasoning Model Efficient](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.17941/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Long chain-of-thought (Long-CoT) reasoning models have motivated a growing body of work on compressing reasoning traces to reduce inference cost, yet existing evaluations focus almost exclusively on task accuracy and token savings. Trustworthiness properties, whether acquired or reinforced through post-training, are encoded in the same parameter space that compression modifies. This means preserving accuracy does not, a priori, guarantee preserving trustworthiness. We conduct the first systematic empirical study of how CoT compression affects model trustworthiness, evaluating multiple models of different scales along three dimensions: safety, hallucination resistance, and multilingual robustness. Under controlled comparisons, we find that CoT compression frequently introduces trustworthiness regressions and that different methods exhibit markedly different degradation profiles across dimensions. To enable fair comparison across bases, we propose a normalized efficiency score for each dimension that reveals how na"ive scalar metrics can obscure trustworthiness trade-offs. As an existence proof, we further introduce an alignment-aware DPO variant that reduces CoT length by 19.3% on reasoning benchmarks with substantially smaller trustworthiness loss. Our findings suggest that CoT compression should be optimized not only for efficiency but also for trustworthiness, treating both as equally important design constraints.