Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

Bag of Tricks for Inference-time Computation of LLM Reasoning

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 2502.07191 v4 pith:KGHAPZOV submitted 2025-02-11 cs.AI

classification cs.AI
keywords reasoningcomputationacrossinference-timemethodstasksbenchmarkperformance
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

With the advancement of large language models (LLMs), solving complex reasoning tasks has gained increasing attention. Inference-time computation methods (e.g., Best-of-N, beam search, et al.) are particularly valuable as they can enhance reasoning performance without modifying model parameters or requiring additional training. However, these techniques come with implementation challenges, and most existing methods remain at the proof-of-concept stage with limited practical adoption due to their computational complexity and varying effectiveness across different tasks. In this paper, we investigate and benchmark diverse inference-time computation strategies across reasoning tasks of varying complexity. Since most current methods rely on a proposer-verifier pipeline that first generates candidate solutions (e.g., reasoning solutions) and then selects the best one based on reward signals (e.g., RLHF rewards, process rewards), our research focuses on optimizing both candidate solution generation (e.g., instructing prompts, hyperparameters such as temperature and top-p) and reward mechanisms (e.g., self-evaluation, reward types). Through extensive experiments (more than 20,000 A100-80G GPU hours with over 1,000 experiments) across a variety of models (e.g., Llama, Qwen, and Mistral families) of various sizes, our ablation studies reveal that previously overlooked strategies can significantly enhance performance (e.g., tuning temperature can improve reasoning task performance by up to 5%). Furthermore, we establish a standardized benchmark for inference-time computation by systematically evaluating six representative methods across eight reasoning tasks. These findings provide a stronger foundation for future research. The code is available at https://github.com/usail-hkust/benchmark_inference_time_computation_LLM

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. Empirical Modeling of Therapist-Client Dynamics in Psychotherapy Using LLM-Based Assessments

    cs.CY 2026-02 reject novelty 6.0 of 10

    LLM-based scoring of 1,610 therapy sessions finds therapist empathy and exploration are followed by more client disclosure, while prior-session rapport is associated with less self-directed negative emotion—but the cl...

  2. Scaling Test-time Compute for LLM Agents

    cs.AI 2025-06 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    On the GAIA benchmark, Best-of-N sampling with list-wise answer selection gives the largest agent gains, and selective (score-triggered) reflection beats reflection at every step.

Pith tools