Is Discrete Difficulty Sufficient? Leveraging Continuous Difficulty for Efficient Self-Consistency in LLMs
On the map: LLM reasoning → Test-time compute and efficient thinking
Abstract (arXiv)
Self-Consistency (SC) is a decoding strategy that samples diverse reasoning paths and selects the most consistent answer, demonstrating strong performance on complex reasoning problems. However, the excessive token consumption incurred by generating multiple reasoning paths has been identified as a major limitation of SC. To improve computational efficiency, several studies have proposed strategies that adjust the number of reasoning paths or allocate resources differentially according to problem difficulty. Nevertheless, most existing methods categorize difficulty into a few fixed levels, failing to fully capture the continuously varying nature of reasoning complexity. In this work, we propose Flexible Self-Consistency (FSC), which estimates problem difficulty as a continuous signal and dynamically adjusts the number of generated reasoning paths accordingly. FSC predicts the output entropy of an input question using a pre-trained probe and leverages it as an indicator of model uncertainty to flexibly control the sampling budget. Experimental results show that, across various models and benchmarks, FSC maintains accuracy comparable to SC while achieving token savings of up to 76%.
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 17 of its 34 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 25 Aug 2026.
Builds on
17 of 34 references.
Closest ancestors · 5
Same direction, newest first
- 2025DiffAdapt: Difficulty-Adaptive Reasoning for Token-Efficient LLM Inference22 Oct
- 2025Less is More Tokens: Efficient Math Reasoning via Difficulty-Aware Chain-of-Thought Distillation5 Sep
- 2025A Survey on Test-Time Scaling in Large Language Models: What, How, Where, and How Well?31 Mar
- 2024Scaling LLM Test-Time Compute Optimally can be More Effective than Scaling Model Parameters6 Aug
- 2024Escape Sky-high Cost: Early-stopping Self-Consistency for Multi-step Reasoning19 Jan
Other references · 12
- 2017Proximal Policy Optimization Algorithmscited by 15,215
- 2024DeepSeekMath: Pushing the Limits of Mathematical Reasoning in Open Language Modelscited by 9,379
- 2020Scaling Laws for Neural Language Modelscited by 6,586
- 2022Self-Consistency Improves Chain of Thought Reasoning in Language Modelscited by 5,708
- 2021Measuring Mathematical Problem Solving With the MATH Datasetcited by 5,371
- 2024Qwen2.5 Technical Reportcited by 4,942
- 2022Training Compute-Optimal Large Language Modelscited by 3,019
- 2023GPQA: A Graduate-Level Google-Proof Q&A Benchmarkcited by 2,879
- 2023A Survey of Large Language Modelscited by 2,576
- 2025Gemma 3 Technical Reportcited by 1,824
- 2025Probing the Difficulty Perception Mechanism of Large Language Modelscited by 8
- 2026Enhancing Safety of Large Language Models via Embedding Space Separationcited by 2
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2024Make Every Penny Count: Difficulty-Adaptive Self-Consistency for Cost-Efficient Reasoning
- 2025Confidence Improves Self-Consistency in LLMs
- 2025Optimal Self-Consistency for Efficient Reasoning with Large Language Models
- 2025Self-Consistency Is Losing Its Edge: Diminishing Returns and Rising Costs in Modern LLMs
- 2026Reliability-Aware Adaptive Self-Consistency for Efficient Sampling in LLM Reasoning
- 2025A Theoretical Study on Bridging Internal Probability and Self-Consistency for LLM Reasoning
- 2026Does Inference Scaling Improve Reasoning Faithfulness? A Multi-Model Analysis of Self-Consistency Tradeoffs
- 2024Reasoning Aware Self-Consistency: Leveraging Reasoning Paths for Efficient LLM Sampling