aiqbench analysis
STATe-of-Thoughts introduces a novel framework for Inference-Time-Compute that shifts reasoning search from stochastic token sampling to discrete, interpretable textual interventions. By decoupling the selection of high-level reasoning actions from generation, this method enhances both output diversity and model interpretability without relying on temperature-based heuristics. The approach offers researchers new tools to explore uncharted regions of an LLM's action space while maintaining rigorous control over its logical pathways.
STATe-of-Thoughts: Structured Action Templates for Tree-of-Thoughts
arXiv:2602.14265v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Inference-Time-Compute (ITC) methods like Best-of-$n$ and Tree-of-Thoughts are meant to produce output candidates that are both high-quality and diverse, but their use of high-temperature sampling often fails to achieve meaningful output diversity. Moreover, existing ITC methods offer limited control over $\textit{how}$ to perform reasoning, which in turn limits their interpretability. We present $\textbf{STATe-of-Thoughts}$ (STATe), an interpretable ITC method that $\textit{searches}$ over high-level reasoning patterns. STATe branches over discrete and interpretable textual interventions rather than over token-level samples: a $\textit{controller}$ selects actions encoding high-level reasoning choices; a $\textit{generator}$ produces reasoning steps conditioned on those choices; and an $\textit{evaluator}$ scores candidates to guide search. This structured approach yields three main advantages. First, action-guided textual interventions reliably influence LLM generations and produce greater response diversity than temperature-based sampling. Second, in a case study on argument generation, STATe's explicit action sequences capture interpretable features that are highly predictive of output quality. Third, estimating the association between performance and action choices allows us to identify promising yet unexplored regions of the action space and steer generation toward them. STATe is most useful when a task admits multiple solutions and when understanding $\textit{why}$ an output succeeds matters beyond $\textit{whether}$ the output succeeds. Together, these results establish STATe as both a practical framework for diverse and controllable text generation, and as a tool for understanding the reasoning patterns that drive performance.
Abstract:Inference-Time-Compute (ITC) methods like Best-of-$n$ and Tree-of-Thoughts are meant to produce output candidates that are both high-quality and diverse, but their use of high-temperature sampling often fails to achieve meaningful output diversity. Moreover, existing ITC methods offer limited control over $\textit{how}$ to perform reasoning, which in turn limits their interpretability. We present $\textbf{STATe-of-Thoughts}$ (STATe), an interpretable ITC method that $\textit{searches}$ over high-level reasoning patterns. STATe branches over discrete and interpretable textual interventions rather than over token-level samples: a $\textit{controller}$ selects actions encoding high-level reasoning choices; a $\textit{generator}$ produces reasoning steps conditioned on those choices; and an $\textit{evaluator}$ scores candidates to guide search. This structured approach yields three main advantages. First, action-guided textual interventions reliably influence LLM generations and produce greater response diversity than temperature-based sampling. Second, in a case study on argument generation, STATe's explicit action sequences capture interpretable features that are highly predictive of output quality. Third, estimating the association between performance and action choices allows us to identify promising yet unexplored regions of the action space and steer generation toward them. STATe is most useful when a task admits multiple solutions and when understanding $\textit{why}$ an output succeeds matters beyond $\textit{whether}$ the output succeeds. Together, these results establish STATe as both a practical framework for diverse and controllable text generation, and as a tool for understanding the reasoning patterns that drive performance.
Accepted to COLM 2026. Version 3. 11 pages main, 85 pages total, 23 tables, 21 figures
Computation and Language (cs.CL); Machine Learning (cs.LG)
I.2.7; I.2.11; H.1.2
arXiv:2602.14265 [cs.CL]
(or arXiv:2602.14265v3 [cs.CL] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2602.14265 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.
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 339 words
Related coverage

Concrete Evaluations to Investigate the OpenAI Model That Hacked Hugging Face
AI Alignment Forum · Aug 3, 2026

Why do models task game?
AI Alignment Forum · Aug 6, 2026

2026.10: You are here 📍
Home Assistant · Oct 7, 2026

I Did This Without Your Knowledge
LessWrong · Oct 17, 2026