Mechanistic Evidence for Faithfulness Decay in Chain-of-Thought Reasoning
Mirrored from arXiv — NLP / Computation & Language for archival readability. Support the source by reading on the original site.
Computer Science > Computation and Language
Title:Mechanistic Evidence for Faithfulness Decay in Chain-of-Thought Reasoning
Abstract:Chain-of-Thought (CoT) explanations are widely used to interpret how language models solve complex problems, yet it remains unclear whether these step-by-step explanations reflect how the model actually reaches its answer, or merely post-hoc justifications. We propose Normalized Logit Difference Decay (NLDD), a metric that measures whether individual reasoning steps are faithful to the model's decision-making process. Our approach corrupts individual reasoning steps from the explanation and measures how much the model's confidence in its answer drops, to determine if a step is truly important. By standardizing these measurements, NLDD enables rigorous cross-model comparison across different architectures. Testing three model families across syntactic, logical, and arithmetic tasks, we discover a consistent Reasoning Horizon (k*) at 70--85% of chain length, beyond which reasoning tokens have little or negative effect on the final answer. We also find that models can encode correct internal representations while completely failing the task. These results show that accuracy alone does not reveal whether a model actually reasons through its chain. NLDD offers a way to measure when CoT matters.
| Comments: | 16 pages, 16 figures. Accepted to ICLR LIT workshop. Code: this https URL |
| Subjects: | Computation and Language (cs.CL) |
| Cite as: | arXiv:2602.11201 [cs.CL] |
| (or arXiv:2602.11201v2 [cs.CL] for this version) | |
| https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2602.11201
arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite
|
Submission history
From: Donald Ye [view email][v1] Wed, 4 Feb 2026 21:55:57 UTC (124 KB)
[v2] Fri, 5 Jun 2026 15:01:24 UTC (141 KB)
Access Paper:
- View PDF
- HTML (experimental)
- TeX Source
References & Citations
Bibliographic and Citation Tools
Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article
Demos
Recommenders and Search Tools
arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators
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.
More from arXiv — NLP / Computation & Language
-
RECAP: Regression Evaluation for Continual Adaptation of Prompts
Jun 8
-
RASFT: Rollout-Adaptive Supervised Fine-Tuning for Reasoning
Jun 8
-
OffQ: Taming Structured Outliers in LLM Quantization by Offsetting
Jun 8
-
DEFINED: A Data-Efficient Computational Framework for Fine-Grained Creativity Assessment in Debate Scenarios
Jun 8
Discussion (0)
Sign in to join the discussion. Free account, 30 seconds — email code or GitHub.
Sign in →No comments yet. Sign in and be the first to say something.