Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 cited by

Disentangling Memory and Reasoning Ability in Large Language Models

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 2411.13504 v3 pith:HEE2MYG3 submitted 2024-11-20 cs.CL

classification cs.CL
keywords knowledgereasoninginferencemodelprocessmemorystepscomplex
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated strong performance in handling complex tasks requiring both extensive knowledge and reasoning abilities. However, the existing LLM inference pipeline operates as an opaque process without explicit separation between knowledge retrieval and reasoning steps, making the model's decision-making process unclear and disorganized. This ambiguity can lead to issues such as hallucinations and knowledge forgetting, which significantly impact the reliability of LLMs in high-stakes domains. In this paper, we propose a new inference paradigm that decomposes the complex inference process into two distinct and clear actions: (1) memory recall: which retrieves relevant knowledge, and (2) reasoning: which performs logical steps based on the recalled knowledge. To facilitate this decomposition, we introduce two special tokens memory and reason, guiding the model to distinguish between steps that require knowledge retrieval and those that involve reasoning. Our experiment results show that this decomposition not only improves model performance but also enhances the interpretability of the inference process, enabling users to identify sources of error and refine model responses effectively. The code is available at https://github.com/MingyuJ666/Disentangling-Memory-and-Reasoning.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID 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. Chain of Methodologies: Scaling Test Time Computation without Training

    cs.CL 2025-06 reject novelty 6.0 of 10

    A prompt framework that interleaves methodology selection with reasoning steps improves LLM math and QA accuracy when combined with a Python interpreter, but the benefit of the methodology selection itself is small an...

  2. Thinking Before You Speak: A Proactive Test-time Scaling Approach

    cs.CL 2025-08 reject novelty 5.0 of 10

    TBYS inserts generated situation-and-goal insights between reasoning steps and reports math accuracy gains, but the insight library is filtered using test-set answers.

  3. Interaction as Intelligence: Deep Research With Human-AI Partnership

    cs.CL 2025-07 reject novelty 5.0 of 10

    A human-in-the-loop deep research system with transparent, interruptible interaction is claimed to outperform commercial baselines, but the evidence is weakened by small samples and biased instructions.

  4. A Survey on Latent Reasoning

    cs.CL 2025-07 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    A survey that organizes latent reasoning methods into vertical recurrence, horizontal recurrence, and infinite-depth diffusion, arguing that silent reasoning can beat explicit chain-of-thought.

Pith tools