mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Why Do Reasoning Models Lose Coverage? The Role of Data and Forks in the Road

arXiv 2605.17026 ↗First posted 16 May 2026cs.LGcited by 4

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

Abstract (arXiv)

Recent progress in large language models has led to the emergence of reasoning models, which have shown strong performance on complex tasks through specialized fine-tuning procedures. While these methods reliably improve pass@1 accuracy, prior works have observed that they show a coverage shrinkage behavior, where pass@k degrades relative to the base model. In this paper, we investigate the cause of reasoning shrinkage under SFT-based post-training. We hypothesize that this behavior is driven by properties of the fine-tuning data, specifically related to decision points or "forks in the road" scenarios where model encounters indecipherable patterns with multiple valid reasoning paths. To test this hypothesis, we design controlled case studies that simulate such decision-point settings, spanning indecipherable nodes in graph branching, and reasoning modes. By tracking post-training dynamics in these settings, we find that the shrinkage phenomenon is tightly correlated with the prevalence of decision-point scenarios in the training data. We also demonstrate that this shrinkage behavior can be partially mitigated through targeted data synthesis design of decision-points and a more systematic diversity-encouraging decoding mechanism. Our findings identify data-centric factors as a key driver of shrinkage in reasoning models and highlight diversity-aware designs as an effective lever for controlling it. (Data and code for reproducing our experiments are available at https://github.com/psunlpgroup/reasoning_forks )

Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Test-time compute and efficient thinking, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 14 of its 33 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 16 May 2026.

Builds on

14 of 33 references.

Closest ancestors · 1

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2025The Illusion of Thinking: Understanding the Strengths and Limitations of Reasoning Models via the Lens of Problem Complexity7 Jun

Other references · 13

  1. 2021Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problemscited by 9,743
  2. 2024DeepSeekMath: Pushing the Limits of Mathematical Reasoning in Open Language Modelscited by 8,851
  3. 2023Let's Verify Step by Stepcited by 3,598
  4. 2024Mixtral of Expertscited by 1,785
  5. 2024OpenAI o1 System Cardcited by 1,220
  6. 2023MetaMath: Bootstrap Your Own Mathematical Questions for Large Language Modelscited by 724
  7. 2024OpenMathInstruct-2: Accelerating AI for Math with Massive Open-Source Instruction Datacited by 194
  8. 2025ProRL: Prolonged Reinforcement Learning Expands Reasoning Boundaries in Large Language Modelscited by 187
  9. 2025Echo Chamber: RL Post-training Amplifies Behaviors Learned in Pretrainingcited by 123
  10. 2022Unveiling Transformers with LEGO: a synthetic reasoning taskcited by 105
  11. 2025Nemotron-Cascade: Scaling Cascaded Reinforcement Learning for General-Purpose Reasoning Modelscited by 45
  12. 2025EvoLM: In Search of Lost Language Model Training Dynamicscited by 16
1 more
  1. 2025Skill-Targeted Adaptive Trainingcited by 6

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 4.

4 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026Reasoning Shift: How Context Silently Shortens LLM Reasoning
  2. 2026Mitigating Overthinking in Large Reasoning Language Models via Reasoning Path Deviation Monitoring
  3. 2025Optimizing Length Compression in Large Reasoning Models
  4. 2026TRACES: Tagging Reasoning Steps for Adaptive Cost-Efficient Early-Stopping
  5. 2026Know Thy Reasoner: Not All Language Models Explore Alike
  6. 2025Finding the Minimal Parameter Budget for Implicit Reasoning: A Data Complexity Driven Scaling Law for Language Models
  7. 2025First Try Matters: Revisiting the Role of Reflection in Reasoning Models
  8. 2026Revisiting Complete Reasoning Traces for Post-Training