Pith. sign in

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

arxiv 2502.00691 v4 pith:4BN74IVU submitted 2025-02-02 cs.AI cs.CLcs.LG

classification cs.AIcs.CLcs.LG
keywords codeexplorationintegrationmodelsreasoningautonomouscapabilitiesexpectation-maximization
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
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.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. StatEval: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Large Language Models in Statistics

    cs.CL 2025-10 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    StatEval is a new 16,000-question statistics benchmark showing that even strong LLMs score below 60% on research-level statistical proof tasks.

  2. Parallel-R1: Towards Parallel Thinking via Reinforcement Learning

    cs.CL 2025-09 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    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.

  3. Reverse-Engineered Reasoning for Open-Ended Generation

    cs.AI 2025-09 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    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.

  4. CoRT: Code-integrated Reasoning within Thinking

    cs.CL 2025-06 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    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.

Pith tools