mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

What Makes Good Multilingual Reasoning? Disentangling Traces with Measurable Features

arXiv 2604.04720 ↗First posted 6 Apr 2026cs.CL cs.AIcited by 4

On the map: LLM reasoning → Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation

Abstract (arXiv)

Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) still exhibit large performance gaps between English and other languages, yet much current work assumes these gaps can be closed simply by making reasoning in every language resemble English reasoning. This work challenges this assumption by asking instead: what actually characterizes successful reasoning traces in multilingual settings, and to what extent do English-derived reasoning features genuinely help in other languages? We first define a suite of measurable reasoning features spanning multilingual alignment, reasoning step, and reasoning flow aspects of reasoning traces, and use logistic regression to quantify how each feature associates with final answer accuracy. We further train sparse autoencoders over multilingual traces to automatically discover latent reasoning concepts that instantiate or extend these features. Finally, we use the features to re-rank traces and measure their impact on accuracy at test time. Across two mathematical reasoning benchmarks, four LRMs, and ten languages, we find that most features are positively associated with accuracy, but the strength of association varies considerably across languages and can even reverse in some. Our findings challenge English-centric reward designs and point toward adaptive objectives that accommodate language-specific reasoning patterns, with concrete implications for multilingual benchmark and reward design.

Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 33 of its 74 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 6 Apr 2026.

Builds on

33 of 74 references.

Closest ancestors · 15

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2026TAPO: Translation Augmented Policy Optimization for Multilingual Mathematical Reasoning26 Mar
  2. 2026R3S: Refining and Recovering Reinforcement Signals for Multilingual Understanding and Reasoning5 Feb
  3. 2026Gained in Translation: Privileged Pairwise Judges Enhance Multilingual Reasoning26 Jan
  4. 2026Do Sparse Autoencoders Identify Reasoning Features in Language Models?9 Jan
  5. 2026Large Reasoning Models Are (Not Yet) Multilingual Latent Reasoners6 Jan
  6. 2025Beg to Differ: Understanding Reasoning-Answer Misalignment Across Languages27 Dec
  7. 2025Why Do Multilingual Reasoning Gaps Emerge in Reasoning Language Models?31 Oct
  8. 2025What Defines Good Reasoning in LLMs? Dissecting Reasoning Steps with Multi-Aspect Evaluation23 Oct
  9. 2025Think Natively: Unlocking Multilingual Reasoning with Consistency-Enhanced Reinforcement Learning8 Oct
  10. 2025Aligning Multilingual Reasoning with Verifiable Semantics from a High-Resource Expert Model29 Sep
  11. 2025Language Matters: How Do Multilingual Input and Reasoning Paths Affect Large Reasoning Models?23 May
  12. 2025Qwen3 Technical Report14 May
3 more
  1. 2025Could Thinking Multilingually Empower LLM Reasoning?16 Apr
  2. 2025I Have Covered All the Bases Here: Interpreting Reasoning Features in Large Language Models via Sparse Autoencoders24 Mar
  3. 2022ROSCOE: A Suite of Metrics for Scoring Step-by-Step Reasoning15 Dec

Other references · 18

  1. 2025DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via Reinforcement Learningcited by 6,330
  2. 2024GPT-4o System Cardcited by 4,588
  3. 2023Sparse Autoencoders Find Highly Interpretable Features in Language Modelscited by 1,420
  4. 2023SelfCheckGPT: Zero-Resource Black-Box Hallucination Detection for Generative Large Language Modelscited by 810
  5. 2023Measuring Faithfulness in Chain-of-Thought Reasoningcited by 703
  6. 2024GSM-Symbolic: Understanding the Limitations of Mathematical Reasoning in Large Language Modelscited by 550
  7. 2022Language Models are Multilingual Chain-of-Thought Reasonerscited by 530
  8. 2025Cognitive Behaviors that Enable Self-Improving Reasoners, or, Four Habits of Highly Effective STaRscited by 377
  9. 2025LLMs Can Easily Learn to Reason from Demonstrations Structure, not content, is what matters!cited by 132
  10. 2025Thought Anchors: Which LLM Reasoning Steps Matter?cited by 129
  11. 2025What's In My Human Feedback? Learning Interpretable Descriptions of Preference Datacited by 26
  12. 2025What Characterizes Effective Reasoning? Revisiting Length, Review, and Structure of CoTcited by 25
6 more
  1. 2025THINK-Bench: Evaluating Thinking Efficiency and Chain-of-Thought Quality of Large Reasoning Modelscited by 19
  2. 2025Mind the Gap... or Not? How Translation Errors and Evaluation Details Skew Multilingual Resultscited by 10
  3. 2025Lexical Hints of Accuracy in LLM Reasoning Chainscited by 9
  4. 2026Multilingual Reasoning Gym: Multilingual Scaling of Procedural Reasoning Environmentscited by 5
  5. 2026ExpLang: Improved Exploration and Exploitation in LLM Reasoning with On-Policy Thinking Language Selectioncited by 3
  6. 2026The Effect of Scripts and Formats on LLM Numeracycited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 4.

4 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025The Reasoning Lingua Franca: A Double-Edged Sword for Multilingual AI
  2. 2026Rethinking the Multilingual Reasoning Gap with Layer Swap
  3. 2025Best-of-L: Cross-Lingual Reward Modeling for Mathematical Reasoning
  4. 2025When Less Language is More: Language-Reasoning Disentanglement Makes LLMs Better Multilingual Reasoners
  5. 2025Learn Globally, Speak Locally: Bridging the Gaps in Multilingual Reasoning
  6. 2025A Comprehensive Evaluation of Multilingual Chain-of-Thought Reasoning: Performance, Consistency, and Faithfulness Across Languages
  7. 2025When Models Reason in Your Language: Controlling Thinking Language Comes at the Cost of Accuracy
  8. 2025A Survey of Multilingual Reasoning in Language Models