Papers › On the Emergence of Thinking in LLMs I: Searching for the Right Intuition

On the Emergence of Thinking in LLMs I: Searching for the Right Intuition

10 Feb 2025arXiv:2502.06773archive 2025-07-28

Guanghao Ye, Khiem Duc Pham, Xinzhi Zhang, Sivakanth Gopi, Baolin Peng, Beibin Li, Janardhan Kulkarni, Huseyin A. Inan

Recent AI advancements, such as OpenAI's new models, are transforming LLMs into LRMs (Large Reasoning Models) that perform reasoning during inference, taking extra time and compute for higher-quality outputs. We aim to uncover the algorithmic framework for training LRMs. Methods like self-consistency, PRM, and AlphaZero suggest reasoning as guided search. We ask: what is the simplest, most scalable way to enable search in LLMs? We propose a post-training framework called Reinforcement Learning via Self-Play (RLSP). RLSP involves three steps: (1) supervised fine-tuning with human or synthetic demonstrations of the reasoning process, (2) using an exploration reward signal to encourage diverse and efficient reasoning behaviors, and (3) RL training with an outcome verifier to ensure correctness while preventing reward hacking. Our key innovation is to decouple exploration and correctness signals during PPO training, carefully balancing them to improve performance and efficiency. Empirical studies in the math domain show that RLSP improves reasoning. On the Llama-3.1-8B-Instruct model, RLSP can boost performance by 23% in MATH-500 test set; On AIME 2024 math problems, Qwen2.5-32B-Instruct improved by 10% due to RLSP. However, a more important finding of this work is that the models trained using RLSP, even with the simplest exploration reward that encourages the model to take more intermediate steps, showed several emergent behaviors such as backtracking, exploration of ideas, and verification. These findings demonstrate that RLSP framework might be enough to enable emergence of complex reasoning abilities in LLMs when scaled. Lastly, we propose a theory as to why RLSP search strategy is more suitable for LLMs inspired by a remarkable result that says CoT provably increases computational power of LLMs, which grows as the number of steps in CoT \cite{li2024chain,merrill2023expresssive}.

PaperPDFCodeCode Syntology ran

In Syntology View this paper on Syntology: its repositories, every harvested function with whether it ran, its licence and the call to fetch it.

Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.

For agents, Syntology's MCP tool lists every function and class Syntology harvested from this paper and whether it ran (how to connect): get_harvested_code_for_paper(arxiv_id="2502.06773")

Code

Syntology Ran 11 of 13 code samples harvested from 1 repository linked to this paper; 2 have no recorded run. Of those that ran: 11 ran with no contract checked.

By repository: official repository: 13 samples from 1 repository, 11 ran. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.

GuanghaoYe/Emergence-of-Thinking officialmentioned on GitHubpytorchApache-2.0 report
OpenLLMAI/OpenLLaMA2 mentioned on GitHubpytorchApache-2.0 report
OpenLLMAI/OpenRLHF mentioned on GitHubpytorchApache-2.0 report
openrlhf/openrlhf mentioned on GitHubpytorchApache-2.0 report

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

13 samples harvested; 11 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 2 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-25; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.

11ran
2unverified

Licence: 0 of the 13 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.

Harvested from GuanghaoYe/Emergence-of-Thinking. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.

Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.

Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.

choice_answer_clean GuanghaoYe/Emergence-of-Thinking/evaluation/grader.py official repository ran fingerprinted Apache-2.0 (permissive) · 809c0178a7ae90ff · report
extract_multi_choice_answer GuanghaoYe/Emergence-of-Thinking/evaluation/parser.py official repository ran fingerprinted Apache-2.0 (permissive) · ed2f4689128f9885 · report
is_choice GuanghaoYe/Emergence-of-Thinking/evaluation/eval_math_data_parallel.py official repository ran Apache-2.0 (permissive) · 32a0caa6856c96c1 · report
is_digit GuanghaoYe/Emergence-of-Thinking/evaluation/grader.py official repository ran Apache-2.0 (permissive) · fb37d3c84b18e368 · report
is_execution_success GuanghaoYe/Emergence-of-Thinking/evaluation/trajectory.py official repository ran Apache-2.0 (permissive) · 581f3949cfdcffa2 · report
is_multi_choice GuanghaoYe/Emergence-of-Thinking/evaluation/eval_math_data_parallel.py official repository ran Apache-2.0 (permissive) · 17fa07643a5a08e5 · report
lower_keys GuanghaoYe/Emergence-of-Thinking/evaluation/utils.py official repository ran Apache-2.0 (permissive) · 0af0b06d6cf22524 · report
majority_voting GuanghaoYe/Emergence-of-Thinking/evaluation/evaluate.py official repository ran Apache-2.0 (permissive) · d12f00f6af3908b6 · report
parse_digits GuanghaoYe/Emergence-of-Thinking/evaluation/grader.py official repository ran fingerprinted Apache-2.0 (permissive) · 7d4b7f8c3875b126 · report
text_to_trajectory GuanghaoYe/Emergence-of-Thinking/evaluation/trajectory.py official repository ran Apache-2.0 (permissive) · 7e48538d19cc0d8f · report
trajectory_to_text GuanghaoYe/Emergence-of-Thinking/evaluation/trajectory.py official repository ran Apache-2.0 (permissive) · 0d7ae684ec6c7537 · report
generate_completions GuanghaoYe/Emergence-of-Thinking/evaluation/model_utils.py official repository unverified Apache-2.0 (permissive) · 25f1381fe69df071 · report
load_hf_lm_and_tokenizer GuanghaoYe/Emergence-of-Thinking/evaluation/model_utils.py official repository unverified Apache-2.0 (permissive) · ee71a94d9dd1b8e9 · report

Tasks

Math

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Methods

AlphaZeroEntropy RegularizationPPO

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections