# Divergent-Convergent Reasoning: Scaling Test-Time Compute through Structured Solution Synthesis

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.15303 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.15303/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Test-time compute and efficient thinking, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning.
- Builds on 20 of its 37 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 15 Aug 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, 20 of 20)

- [Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.14168/) (2021)
- [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)
- [Tree of Thoughts: Deliberate Problem Solving with Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.10601/) (2023)
- [Scaling LLM Test-Time Compute Optimally can be More Effective than Scaling Model Parameters](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.03314/) (2024)
- [s1: Simple test-time scaling](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.19393/) (2025)
- [Solving math word problems with process- and outcome-based feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2211.14275/) (2022)
- [SFT Memorizes, RL Generalizes: A Comparative Study of Foundation Model Post-training](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.17161/) (2025)
- [LIMO: Less is More for Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.03387/) (2025)
- [Inference Scaling Laws: An Empirical Analysis of Compute-Optimal Inference for Problem-Solving with Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.00724/) (2024)
- [Rewarding Progress: Scaling Automated Process Verifiers for LLM Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.08146/) (2024)
- [Recursive Introspection: Teaching Language Model Agents How to Self-Improve](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.18219/) (2024)
- [Beyond Chinchilla-Optimal: Accounting for Inference in Language Model Scaling Laws](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.00448/) (2023)
- [Stream of Search (SoS): Learning to Search in Language](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.03683/) (2024)
- [From Decoding to Meta-Generation: Inference-time Algorithms for Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.16838/) (2024)
- [LMCache: An Efficient KV Cache Layer for Enterprise-Scale LLM Inference](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.09665/) (2025)
- [Beyond Majority Voting: LLM Aggregation by Leveraging Higher-Order Information](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.01499/) (2025)
- [Are More LLM Calls All You Need? Towards Scaling Laws of Compound Inference Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.02419/) (2024)
- [Multi-Agent Debate for LLM Judges with Adaptive Stability Detection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.12697/) (2025)
- [Stop When Enough: Adaptive Early-Stopping for Chain-of-Thought Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.10103/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Test-time compute can substantially improve Large Language Model (LLM) reasoning performance, yet how and when additional compute helps remains poorly understood. We study Divergent-Convergent Reasoning (DCR), a simple two-phase primitive consisting of an exploration phase that generates multiple candidate solutions followed by a convergent reconciliation phase. We present three core results. First, we show that even a single reconciliation step can reliably amplify correct minority reports: across datasets, DCR often recovers the correct answer when correct exploration outputs are in the minority, a regime where majority voting fails. Second, we introduce recursive DCR, an autoregressive reconciliation system that iteratively analyzes disagreements and allocates additional test-time compute. Recursive DCR achieves higher accuracy than fixed-compute baselines-reaching 93.3% on AIME 2024 and 92.0% on AIME 2025-while using roughly 27% less compute on average, demonstrating that attentive resource allocation is superior to uniform scaling. Third, we analyze disagreement among exploration outputs via a simple, training-free dispersion metric. Dispersion reveals a structured relationship between disagreement and test-time gains: in regimes where DCR is effective, higher disagreement among exploration outputs is associated with larger accuracy improvements from reconciliation. Together, these results show that disagreement, often viewed as noise, can be systematically exploited to improve test-time reasoning and reveal emerging scaling laws for agentic LLM systems.