Integrated and Cross-Architecture Interpretation of LLM Reasoning
On the map: LLM reasoning → Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation
Abstract (arXiv)
Understanding how LLMs reason is hindered by a practical asymmetry: while their generated outputs are observable, the underlying reasoning patterns remain opaque. Relying on single probes, such as Mutual Information Peak (MIP) or Deep-Thinking Ratio (DTR), risks underestimating the genuine inferential structure. To response this deficiency, we present an Integrated, cross-Architecture Reasoning (IAR) framework, designed to provide a unified approach to LLM reasoning interpretability. Specifically, we first propose to use bandwidth-calibrated MIP coupled with Tukey IQR peak-detection to isolate reasoning-crucial tokens at the output layer. Second, we performed an overlap analysis between MIP-picked tokens and DTR-deep tokens to trace the cross-layer trajectories of those tokens. This also discloses whether reasoning-crucial tokens are computation-intensive as well, further facilitating to understand how reasoning patterns evolve across model layers. Finally, we apply a Jaccard stability metric over multi-domain problems to verify if the MIP-identified tokens are reasoning quality-guaranteed. Extensive experiments on six models across four domains (mathematics, code, logic, and common sense) demonstrate IAR's generalizable interpretation capabilities across architectures. Our code is available at https://github.com/LeonardoMatthew/IAR.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 8 of its 48 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 27 May 2026.
Builds on
8 of 48 references.
References · 8
- 2021Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problemscited by 9,743
- 2025DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via Reinforcement Learningcited by 6,146
- 2021Program Synthesis with Large Language Modelscited by 3,509
- 2024OpenAI o1 System Cardcited by 1,220
- 2023Measuring Faithfulness in Chain-of-Thought Reasoningcited by 668
- 2023Eliciting Latent Predictions from Transformers with the Tuned Lenscited by 579
- 2024Let's Think Dot by Dot: Hidden Computation in Transformer Language Modelscited by 186
- 2026Think Deep, Not Just Long: Measuring LLM Reasoning Effort via Deep-Thinking Tokenscited by 21
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025A Modular Dataset to Demonstrate LLM Abstraction Capability
- 2025LLMSR@XLLM25: An Empirical Study of LLM for Structural Reasoning
- 2025ReasonBENCH: Benchmarking the (In)Stability of LLM Reasoning
- 2026LGMT: Logic-Grounded Metamorphic Testing for Evaluating the Reasoning Reliability of LLMs
- 2026X-RAY: Mapping LLM Reasoning Capability via Formalized and Calibrated Probes
- 2026Can We Trust LLM's Logic? Quantifying Uncertainty, Coherence, and Robustness via a Graph-Based Framework
- 2026The Periodic Table of LLM Reasoning: A Structured Survey of Reasoning Paradigms, Methods, and Failure Modes
- 2023DetermLR: Augmenting LLM-based Logical Reasoning from Indeterminacy to Determinacy