# Understanding Performance Gap Between Parallel and Sequential Sampling in Large Reasoning Models

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.05868 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.05868/

## Key facts

- Cited by 4 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 31 of its 41 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 7 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, 30 of 31)

- [Proximal Policy Optimization Algorithms](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1707.06347/) (2017)
- [DeepSeekMath: Pushing the Limits of Mathematical Reasoning in Open Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.03300/) (2024)
- [Qwen3 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.09388/) (2025)
- [DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.12948/) (2025)
- [Self-Consistency Improves Chain of Thought Reasoning in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.11171/) (2022)
- [Gemini 2.5: Pushing the Frontier with Advanced Reasoning, Multimodality, Long Context, and Next Generation Agentic Capabilities](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.06261/) (2025)
- [LiveCodeBench: Holistic and Contamination Free Evaluation of Large Language Models for Code](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.07974/) (2024)
- [Scaling LLM Test-Time Compute Optimally can be More Effective than Scaling Model Parameters](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.03314/) (2024)
- [OpenAI o1 System Card](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.16720/) (2024)
- [Large Language Models Cannot Self-Correct Reasoning Yet](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.01798/) (2023)
- [Teaching Large Language Models to Self-Debug](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.05128/) (2023)
- [AlphaEvolve: A coding agent for scientific and algorithmic discovery](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.13131/) (2025)
- [Enhancing Chat Language Models by Scaling High-quality Instructional Conversations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.14233/) (2023)
- [StarCoder: may the source be with you!](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.06161/) (2023)
- [Alphazero-like Tree-Search can Guide Large Language Model Decoding and Training](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.17179/) (2023)
- [DeepSeek-Prover-V1.5: Harnessing Proof Assistant Feedback for Reinforcement Learning and Monte-Carlo Tree Search](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.08152/) (2024)
- [S*: Test Time Scaling for Code Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.14382/) (2025)
- [Gemini Embedding: Generalizable Embeddings from Gemini](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.07891/) (2025)
- [DeepSeekMath-V2: Towards Self-Verifiable Mathematical Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2511.22570/) (2025)
- [Parallel-R1: Towards Parallel Thinking via Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.07980/) (2025)
- [Co-Evolving LLM Coder and Unit Tester via Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.03136/) (2025)
- [SETS: Leveraging Self-Verification and Self-Correction for Improved Test-Time Scaling](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.19306/) (2025)
- [Does Thinking More always Help? Mirage of Test-Time Scaling in Reasoning Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.04210/) (2025)
- [Inverse Scaling in Test-Time Compute](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.14417/) (2025)
- [The Majority is not always right: RL training for solution aggregation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.06870/) (2025)
- [Think Twice: Enhancing LLM Reasoning by Scaling Multi-round Test-time Thinking](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.19855/) (2025)
- [ParaThinker: Native Parallel Thinking as a New Paradigm to Scale LLM Test-time Compute](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.04475/) (2025)
- [Recursive Self-Aggregation Unlocks Deep Thinking in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.26626/) (2025)
- [LLMs Can Generate a Better Answer by Aggregating Their Own Responses](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.04104/) (2025)
- [PaCoRe: Learning to Scale Test-Time Compute with Parallel Coordinated Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.05593/) (2026)

## Built on by (most cited first, 4 of 4)

- [Using Reward Uncertainty to Induce Diverse Behaviour in Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.03962/) (2026)
- [It's the Problem, Not the Path: Budget and Difficulty Confounds in LLM Reasoning Trajectories](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.03436/) (2026)
- [Scaling of Capability and Efficiency at Inference Time in Large Reasoning Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.27166/) (2026)
- [When Does Longer Reasoning Help? Predicting Mathematical Reasoning Through Discovery and Execution](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2610.05322/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) have shown remarkable performance on challenging questions, such as math and coding. However, to obtain a high quality solution, one may need to sample more than once. In principal, there are two sampling strategies that can be composed to form more complex processes: sequential sampling and parallel sampling. In this paper, we first compare these two approaches with rigor, and observe, aligned with previous works, that parallel sampling seems to outperform sequential sampling even though the latter should have more representation power. To understand the underline reasons, we make three hypothesis on the reason behind this behavior: (i) parallel sampling outperforms due to the aggregator operator; (ii) sequential sampling is harmed by needing to use longer contexts; (iii) sequential sampling leads to less exploration due to conditioning on previous answers. The empirical evidence on various model families and sizes (Qwen3, DeepSeek-R1 distilled models, Gemini 2.5) and question domains (math and coding) suggests that the aggregation and context length do not seem to be the main culprit behind the performance gap. In contrast, the lack of exploration seems to play a considerably larger role, and we argue that this is one main cause for the performance gap.