REVIEW 4 cited by
To Code or not to Code? Adaptive Tool Integration for Math Language Models via Expectation-Maximization
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
Recent advances in mathematical problem-solving with language models (LMs) integrate chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning and code execution to harness their complementary strengths. However, existing hybrid frameworks exhibit a critical limitation: they depend on externally dictated instructions or rigid code-integration templates, lacking metacognitive awareness -- the capacity to dynamically evaluate intrinsic capabilities and autonomously determine when and how to integrate tools. This rigidity motivates our study of autonomous code integration, enabling models to adapt tool-usage strategies as their reasoning abilities evolve during training. While reinforcement learning (RL) shows promise for boosting LLM reasoning at scale (e.g., DeepSeek-R1), we demonstrate its inefficiency in learning autonomous code integration due to inadequate exploration of the vast combinatorial space of CoT-code interleaving patterns. To address this challenge, we propose a novel Expectation-Maximization (EM) framework that synergizes structured exploration (E-step) with off-policy RL optimization (M-step), creating a self-reinforcing cycle between metacognitive tool-use decisions and evolving capabilities. Experiments reveal our method achieves superior results through improved exploration. Notably, our 7B model improves over 11% on MATH500 and 9.4% on AIME without o1-like CoT.
Forward citations
Cited by 4 Pith papers
-
StatEval: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Large Language Models in Statistics
StatEval is a new 16,000-question statistics benchmark showing that even strong LLMs score below 60% on research-level statistical proof tasks.
-
Parallel-R1: Towards Parallel Thinking via Reinforcement Learning
Parallel-R1 uses SFT cold-start on easy math plus GRPO on hard math to instill parallel thinking in Qwen3-4B, reporting 8.4% average accuracy gains and a 42.9% AIME25 gain from a parallel-exploration scaffold.
-
Reverse-Engineered Reasoning for Open-Ended Generation
Given a high-quality output, the authors search for a thinking trace that minimizes that output's perplexity, then fine-tune Qwen3-8B on 20,000 such traces, reporting writing performance near GPT-4o and Claude 3.5.
-
CoRT: Code-integrated Reasoning within Thinking
Inserting targeted hints into a few training examples teaches reasoning models to compute with Python instead of text, improving accuracy and cutting token use by 30 to 50 percent.
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.