Reasoning Shift: How Context Silently Shortens LLM Reasoning

arXiv:2604.01161v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) exhibiting test-time scaling behavior, such as extended reasoning traces and self-verification, have demonstrated remarkable performance on complex, long-term reasoning tasks. However, the robustness of these reasoning behaviors remains underexplored. To investigate this, we conduct a systematic evaluation of multiple reasoning models across three scenarios: (1) problems augmented with lengthy, irrelevant context; (2) multi-turn conversational settings with independent tasks; and (3) problems presented as a subtask within a complex task. We observe an interesting phenomenon: reasoning models tend to produce much shorter reasoning traces (up to 74%) for the same problem under different context conditions compared to the traces produced when the problem is presented in isolation. A finer-grained analysis reveals that this compression is associated with a decrease in self-verification and uncertainty management behaviors, such as double-checking. Importantly, we show that even when additional self-checks are forced, their efficiency depends not only on the content of the reasoning traces, but also on the presence of redundant context. We hope our findings draw additional attention to both the robustness of reasoning models and the problem of context management for LLMs.

Abstract:Large language models (LLMs) exhibiting test-time scaling behavior, such as extended reasoning traces and self-verification, have demonstrated remarkable performance on complex, long-term reasoning tasks. However, the robustness of these reasoning behaviors remains underexplored. To investigate this, we conduct a systematic evaluation of multiple reasoning models across three scenarios: (1) problems augmented with lengthy, irrelevant context; (2) multi-turn conversational settings with independent tasks; and (3) problems presented as a subtask within a complex task. We observe an interesting phenomenon: reasoning models tend to produce much shorter reasoning traces (up to 74%) for the same problem under different context conditions compared to the traces produced when the problem is presented in isolation. A finer-grained analysis reveals that this compression is associated with a decrease in self-verification and uncertainty management behaviors, such as double-checking. Importantly, we show that even when additional self-checks are forced, their efficiency depends not only on the content of the reasoning traces, but also on the presence of redundant context. We hope our findings draw additional attention to both the robustness of reasoning models and the problem of context management for LLMs.

Machine Learning (cs.LG)

arXiv:2604.01161 [cs.LG]

(or arXiv:2604.01161v3 [cs.LG] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2604.01161 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite

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.

aiqbench analysis

Reasoning Shift: How Context Silently Shortens LLM Reasoning

Related coverage