Chain of Faith: Policy-Internal Rewards for Reasoning Reliance

Chain-of-thought (CoT) explanations can sound plausible while having little influence on a model's final answer. We study four rewards that use the policy's own signals to encourage reliance on generated reasoning: gradient sensitivity, confidence gaps, progressive confidence gains, and reasoning--prompt swaps. We add each reward to group relative policy optimization (GRPO) and evaluate two small instruction-tuned models on GSM8K and StrategyQA using reasoning edits, paraphrases, and prompt hints. Several configurations increase answer reliance to reasoning edits, while effects on accuracy and paraphrase robustness vary. We also observe answer copying at a high reward weight and high reliance in decomposition settings with poor task accuracy. The study compares practical objectives for reasoning reliance, confirms the trade-off between reliance and performance, and proposes four lightweight rewards that can improve reasoning reliance.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
arXiv (Cornell University)
Published
2026-11-02
DOI
https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2611.02672
Primary Topic
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
Type
preprint
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
preprint

Chain of Faith: Policy-Internal Rewards for Reasoning Reliance

Zhaodan Kong, Xin Liu, Fanyu meng
arXiv (Cornell University)
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
preprint

Chain of Faith: Policy-Internal Rewards for Reasoning Reliance

Zhaodan Kong, Xin Liu, Fanyu meng
preprint en

Abstract

Chain-of-thought (CoT) explanations can sound plausible while having little influence on a model's final answer. We study four rewards that use the policy's own signals to encourage reliance on generated reasoning: gradient sensitivity, confidence gaps, progressive confidence gains, and reasoning--prompt swaps. We add each reward to group relative policy optimization (GRPO) and evaluate two small instruction-tuned models on GSM8K and StrategyQA using reasoning edits, paraphrases, and prompt hints. Several configurations increase answer reliance to reasoning edits, while effects on accuracy and paraphrase robustness vary. We also observe answer copying at a high reward weight and high reliance in decomposition settings with poor task accuracy. The study compares practical objectives for reasoning reliance, confirms the trade-off between reliance and performance, and proposes four lightweight rewards that can improve reasoning reliance.

arXiv (Cornell University)
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Laika access coming soon