aiqbench analysis
This research introduces a "backward reasoning" training methodology designed to improve large language models' ability to adapt their thinking patterns when facing complex mathematical problems. By constructing datasets with both forward and backward reasoning paths alongside a fine-grained reward mechanism, the study aims to enhance inference accuracy and avoid common error sources like insufficient solution-space coverage. The approach offers a novel paradigm for increasing model flexibility beyond standard forward-only chain-of-thought processes.
Construting Reverse Thinking: Developing Large Language Models' Reverse Thingking Ability
arXiv:2609.24760v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: When facing complex problems, humans tend to try various ideas for different issues. Human thinking patterns exhibit remarkable flexibility in adapting to diverse scenarios. GPT-o1, GPT-o3, and DeepSeek-R1 adopt long chain-of-thought models to address complex problems by increasing reasoning depth, which default to a forward reasoning mode. We conducted statistical analysis on the accuracy of different mathematical problem datasets on models of different scales, and found five reasons for errors: Insufficient solution-space coverage, Computational mistakes, Unverified assumptions, Ignoring constraint conditions, Maximum response length limitation. To address the above issues, we proposed a backward reasoning pattern construction method aimed at enhancing the model's reverse thinking ability and dynamic adaptability. First, we constructed an easy-hard two-stage Math dataset for training large models and gradually improving their inference ability at different difficulty levels. The dataset contains forward reasoning paths as well as backward reasoning paths. And a two-stage supervised fine-tuning process is applied to progressively train the model's backward reasoning capability. Furthermore, a fine-grained reward mechanism is developed, employing smoothed reward signals to strengthen the model's ability to autonomously select thinking modes during the reasoning process, thereby avoiding reward hacking. A linear-decay balanced sampling strategy is designed to maintain a balance between forward and backward reasoning path samples during training, enabling the model to converge quickly and stably. Experimental results show that our method significantly improves reasoning efficiency and accuracy in tasks such as mathematical proofs, offering a flexible and efficient reasoning paradigm for solving complex problems.
Abstract:When facing complex problems, humans tend to try various ideas for different issues. Human thinking patterns exhibit remarkable flexibility in adapting to diverse scenarios. GPT-o1, GPT-o3, and DeepSeek-R1 adopt long chain-of-thought models to address complex problems by increasing reasoning depth, which default to a forward reasoning mode. We conducted statistical analysis on the accuracy of different mathematical problem datasets on models of different scales, and found five reasons for errors: Insufficient solution-space coverage, Computational mistakes, Unverified assumptions, Ignoring constraint conditions, Maximum response length limitation. To address the above issues, we proposed a backward reasoning pattern construction method aimed at enhancing the model's reverse thinking ability and dynamic adaptability. First, we constructed an easy-hard two-stage Math dataset for training large models and gradually improving their inference ability at different difficulty levels. The dataset contains forward reasoning paths as well as backward reasoning paths. And a two-stage supervised fine-tuning process is applied to progressively train the model's backward reasoning capability. Furthermore, a fine-grained reward mechanism is developed, employing smoothed reward signals to strengthen the model's ability to autonomously select thinking modes during the reasoning process, thereby avoiding reward hacking. A linear-decay balanced sampling strategy is designed to maintain a balance between forward and backward reasoning path samples during training, enabling the model to converge quickly and stably. Experimental results show that our method significantly improves reasoning efficiency and accuracy in tasks such as mathematical proofs, offering a flexible and efficient reasoning paradigm for solving complex problems.
Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
arXiv:2609.24760 [cs.AI]
(or arXiv:2609.24760v1 [cs.AI] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.24760 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 338 words
Related coverage
The J-Space Debate, Agent Swarms, and Pacing Frontier AI - Digital Minds Newsletter #4
LessWrong · Sep 18, 2026

Informe de riesgos de la IA de frontera (febrero–marzo de 2026)
METR · May 19, 2026

Frontier AI Risk Report (February–March 2026)
METR · May 19, 2026

Frontier Risk Report (February to March 2026)
METR · May 19, 2026