arXiv — NLP / Computation & Language · · 3 min read

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

arXiv:2602.11201 (cs)
[Submitted on 4 Feb 2026 (v1), last revised 5 Jun 2026 (this version, v2)]

Title:Mechanistic Evidence for Faithfulness Decay in Chain-of-Thought Reasoning

View a PDF of the paper titled Mechanistic Evidence for Faithfulness Decay in Chain-of-Thought Reasoning, by Donald Ye and 4 other authors
View PDF HTML (experimental)
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)
Full-text links:

Access Paper:

Current browse context:

cs.CL
< prev   |   next >
Change to browse by:
cs

References & Citations

Loading...

BibTeX formatted citation

loading...
Data provided by:

Bookmark

BibSonomy Reddit
Bibliographic Tools

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Bibliographic Explorer Toggle
Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)
Connected Papers Toggle
Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)
Litmaps Toggle
Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)
scite.ai Toggle
scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)
Code, Data, Media

Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article

alphaXiv Toggle
alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?)
Links to Code Toggle
CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)
DagsHub Toggle
DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)
GotitPub Toggle
Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)
Huggingface Toggle
Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?)
ScienceCast Toggle
ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)
Demos

Demos

Replicate Toggle
Replicate (What is Replicate?)
Spaces Toggle
Hugging Face Spaces (What is Spaces?)
Spaces Toggle
TXYZ.AI (What is TXYZ.AI?)
Related Papers

Recommenders and Search Tools

Link to Influence Flower
Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)
Core recommender toggle
CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)
About arXivLabs

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.

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.

More from arXiv — NLP / Computation & Language