mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

ReFlect: An Effective Harness System for Complex Long-Horizon LLM Reasoning

arXiv 2605.05737 ↗First posted 7 May 2026cs.AI cs.CLcited by 1

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

Abstract (arXiv)

Current reasoning paradigms for LLMs include chain-of-thought, ReAct, and post-hoc self-critique. These paradigms rely on two assumptions that fail on long-horizon, multi-stage tasks. As a result, errors accumulate silently across reasoning steps, leaving an open question: can a reasoning system effectively detect and recover from its own failures? We present ReFlect, a harness system for LLM reasoning that creates standalone error detection and recovery logic as a deterministic wrapper around the model. Controlled experiments across 6 reasoning domains show that prompt-level self-critique produces formulaic templates that flag no issues in 90 of 100 audited reflection blocks, and the investigated LLMs wrongly accept a wrong answer in at least 76% of cases. Our ReFlect harness achieves task success rates ranging from 41% on gpt-4o-mini to 56% on Claude Sonnet 4.5 across six models spanning small and frontier scale, with per-model gains over Direct CoT ranging from +7 pp on Qwen2.5-72B to +29 pp on Claude Sonnet 4.5, and additionally raises SWE-bench patch-structural quality from 0% (Direct CoT) to between 82% (Qwen2.5-72B) and 87% (GPT-4o). Notably, the harness gain is inversely proportional to the model's Direct CoT task success rate (the fitted slope is -1.69 with r=-0.76): each pp lost in baseline success rate is mechanically recovered by 1.69 pp of harness gain. We spot that adding structured reasoning state and operators yields only 15.0--18.7% pair-mean on Llama-3.3-70B and Qwen2.5-72B because models at this scale cannot reliably populate the state its operators require. ReFlect is model-agnostic, training-free, and operates entirely at inference time.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper 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 6 of its 29 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 7 May 2026.

Builds on

6 of 29 references.

Closest ancestors · 2

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2025Self-Correction Bench: Uncovering and Addressing the Self-Correction Blind Spot in Large Language Models3 Jul
  2. 2025Beyond Exponential Decay: Rethinking Error Accumulation in Large Language Models30 May

Other references · 4

  1. 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,715
  2. 2022ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Modelscited by 8,695
  3. 2024Qwen2.5 Technical Reportcited by 4,942
  4. 2023ART: Automatic multi-step reasoning and tool-use for large language modelscited by 197

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025ReflCtrl: Controlling LLM Reflection Efficiently via Representation Engineering
  2. 2025Double-Checker: Enhancing Reasoning of Slow-Thinking LLMs via Self-Critical Fine-Tuning
  3. 2025Not All Errors Are Created Equal: ASCoT Addresses Late-Stage Fragility in Efficient LLM Reasoning
  4. 2025Dancing with Critiques: Enhancing LLM Reasoning with Stepwise Natural Language Self-Critique
  5. 2025LLMSR@XLLM25: An Empirical Study of LLM for Structural Reasoning
  6. 2025Reflective Confidence: Correcting Reasoning Flaws via Online Self-Correction
  7. 2024Enhancing LLM Reasoning via Critique Models with Test-Time and Training-Time Supervision
  8. 2026Self-Verification Dilemma: Experience-Driven Suppression of Overused Checking in LLM Reasoning