# Beyond Repeated Sampling: Learning Search Policies for LLM Reasoning

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.26704 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.26704/

## 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 29 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 22 Sep 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, 17 of 17)

- [The Llama 3 Herd of Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.21783/) (2024)
- [DeepSeekMath: Pushing the Limits of Mathematical Reasoning in Open Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.03300/) (2024)
- [Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Code](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2107.03374/) (2021)
- [Scaling Laws for Neural Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2001.08361/) (2020)
- [Self-Consistency Improves Chain of Thought Reasoning in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.11171/) (2022)
- [Measuring Mathematical Problem Solving With the MATH Dataset](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.03874/) (2021)
- [Qwen2.5 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.15115/) (2024)
- [HybridFlow: A Flexible and Efficient RLHF Framework](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.19256/) (2024)
- [Scaling LLM Test-Time Compute Optimally can be More Effective than Scaling Model Parameters](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.03314/) (2024)
- [Qwen3 Embedding: Advancing Text Embedding and Reranking Through Foundation Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.05176/) (2025)
- [Large Language Monkeys: Scaling Inference Compute with Repeated Sampling](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.21787/) (2024)
- [Automatic Chain of Thought Prompting in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.03493/) (2022)
- [Olmo 3](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2512.13961/) (2025)
- [ToolOrchestra: Elevating Intelligence via Efficient Model and Tool Orchestration](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2511.21689/) (2025)
- [RLAD: Training LLMs to Discover Abstractions for Solving Reasoning Problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.02263/) (2025)
- [Benchmarks Saturate When The Model Gets Smarter Than The Judge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.19532/) (2026)
- [Not the Example, but the Process: How Self-Generated Examples Enhance LLM Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.15863/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Large language models increasingly tackle hard reasoning problems by spending more test-time compute, yet the dominant strategy remains naive repeated sampling: draw many independent solutions and hope one is correct. Because such sampling explores only through local decoding noise, it tends to produce many near duplicate attempts rather than genuinely different ideas. We ask whether exploration can instead be steered at a semantic level, by first sampling problem specific concepts, hints, or strategies and then conditioning answer generation on them. We refine this into a simple, more exploratory procedure that emits many diverse concepts in a single trajectory, and evaluate it on hard problems where repeated sampling struggles. We then go a step further and make concept generation trainable: a small concept generator is optimized with reinforcement learning so that its concepts maximize the downstream success of a larger, frozen answer generator. On hard mathematical reasoning problems, the trained concept generator substantially improves the answer generator's pass@k over naive repeated sampling at the same answer generation allocation, surpasses concepts drawn from much larger untuned models, and transfers to answer generators it was never trained against, including a model from a different family. A small model can thus be trained into an effective, reusable search policy for a much larger one.
