Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

CoIn: Counting the Invisible Reasoning Tokens in Commercial Opaque LLM APIs

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 2505.13778 v1 pith:UP3CPV47 submitted 2025-05-19 cs.AI

CoIn: Counting the Invisible Reasoning Tokens in Commercial Opaque LLM APIs

classification cs.AI
keywords reasoningtokencointokensapiscommercialcountdetect
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

As post-training techniques evolve, large language models (LLMs) are increasingly augmented with structured multi-step reasoning abilities, often optimized through reinforcement learning. These reasoning-enhanced models outperform standard LLMs on complex tasks and now underpin many commercial LLM APIs. However, to protect proprietary behavior and reduce verbosity, providers typically conceal the reasoning traces while returning only the final answer. This opacity introduces a critical transparency gap: users are billed for invisible reasoning tokens, which often account for the majority of the cost, yet have no means to verify their authenticity. This opens the door to token count inflation, where providers may overreport token usage or inject synthetic, low-effort tokens to inflate charges. To address this issue, we propose CoIn, a verification framework that audits both the quantity and semantic validity of hidden tokens. CoIn constructs a verifiable hash tree from token embedding fingerprints to check token counts, and uses embedding-based relevance matching to detect fabricated reasoning content. Experiments demonstrate that CoIn, when deployed as a trusted third-party auditor, can effectively detect token count inflation with a success rate reaching up to 94.7%, showing the strong ability to restore billing transparency in opaque LLM services. The dataset and code are available at https://github.com/CASE-Lab-UMD/LLM-Auditing-CoIn.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. Hollow-LLM Attack: Computationally Trivial Weights in Zero-Knowledge Verification of LLM Inference

    cs.CR 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0

    ZK-verified LLM inference can be fooled: a provider can serve a small model while producing valid proofs for a much larger declared model by embedding structure-preserving ghost weights.

  2. Pay for The Second-Best Service: A Game-Theoretic Approach Against Dishonest LLM Providers

    cs.GT 2025-11 conditional novelty 6.0

    A delegation mechanism makes near-truthful behavior approximately dominant for LLM API providers, and a matching impossibility result caps user utility at the second-best honest service.

  3. Computational Challenges in Token Economics: Bridging Economic Theory and AI System Design

    cs.AI 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    The paper defines Computational Token Economics and introduces the Token Economics Trilemma as a framework for trade-offs in granularity, real-time performance, and optimality, while outlining a research agenda for th...