Decoding the Critique Mechanism in Large Reasoning Models
Abstract
Large Reasoning Models demonstrate hidden critique abilities that allow error recovery through internal mechanisms, identified via interpretable critique vectors that enhance error detection without additional training.
Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) exhibit backtracking and self-verification mechanisms that enable them to revise intermediate steps and reach correct solutions, yielding strong performance on complex logical benchmarks. We hypothesize that such behaviors are beneficial only when the model has sufficiently strong ``critique'' ability to detect its own mistakes. This work systematically investigates how current LRMs recover from errors by inserting arithmetic mistakes in their intermediate reasoning steps. Notably, we discover a peculiar yet important phenomenon: despite the error propagating throughout the entire chain-of-thought (CoT) without any verbalized correction, the model still reaches the correct final answer after the thinking process finishes. This recovery implies the existence of an internal mechanism helping the model to detect errors and trigger self-correction, which we refer to as the hidden critique ability. Building on feature space analysis, we identify a highly interpretable critique vector representing this behavior. Extensive experiments across multiple model scales and families demonstrate that steering latent representations with this vector improves the model's error detection capability and enhances the performance of test-time scaling at no extra training cost. Our findings provide a valuable understanding of LRMs' critique behavior, suggesting a promising direction to control and improve their self-verification mechanism. Our code is available at: https://github.com/mail-research/lrm-critique-vectors.
Community
Reasoning models can silently fix corrupted thinking traces without verbalizing a correction, revealing a hidden critique ability. By steering the "critique vector" in the latent space, we can boost error detection and test-time scaling performance at no additional cost.
the idea that a latent critique vector can be steered to boost error detection in lrms is tasty, but i want to see how robust this is to different error types and prompt distributions. the claim that recovered vs baseline runs are linearly separable in activation space hinges on where you extract that vector, and i would like to see a cross-layer ablation showing if the effect survives different probing points. a simple followup would be fixing the vector and measuring calibration of the verifier across tasks with varied mistakes, not just arithmetic, to test true generalization. btw the arxivlens breakdown helped me parse the method details, and it's worth a look; they also show how the vector transfers across model families, which is encouraging for real-world use.
Models citing this paper 0
No model linking this paper
Datasets citing this paper 0
No dataset linking this paper
Spaces citing this paper 0
No Space linking this paper
Collections including this paper 0
No Collection including this paper