Draft-Thinking: Learning Efficient Reasoning in Long Chain-of-Thought LLMs
Jie Cao, Tianwei Lin, Zhenxuan Fan, Bo Yuan, Ziyuan Zhao, Rolan Yan, Wenqiao Zhang, Siliang Tang
Paper appears method- or tooling-adjacent to AI workflows with partial ecosystem coverage.
Long chain-of-thought~(CoT) has become a dominant paradigm for enhancing the reasoning capability of large reasoning models~(LRMs); however, the performance gains often come with a substantial increase in reasoning budget. Recent studies show that existing CoT paradigms tend to induce systematic overthinking, unnecessarily coupling reasoning capability with reasoning cost. Most prior approaches reduce token usage thr ...
ough post hoc techniques such as token compression, truncation, or length penalties, without explicitly addressing the core mechanisms of reasoning. We propose \textbf{Draft-Thinking}, which guides models to first learn a concise \textit{draft-style} reasoning structure that retains only the critical reasoning steps. Through a \textit{progressive curriculum learning}, the model stably internalizes this efficient reasoning pattern as its capability scales. Moreover, Draft-Thinking introduces adaptive prompting, which elevates reasoning depth to a flexible, model-selectable behavior. Extensive experiments demonstrate that Draft-Thinking substantially reduces reasoning budget while largely preserving reasoning performance; for example, on MATH500, it achieves an 82.6\% reduction in reasoning budget at the cost of only a 2.6\% performance drop.
Researcher verdict
Useful paper, but implementation path is weak
This page is useful as a benchmark reference and for scoping a cautious reproduction plan, but there is not enough implementation evidence yet to treat it as a trusted build baseline.
Why this page is still worth reading
- Benchmark findings give you an audit trail for validation before picking an implementation path.
- Reproduction risks are surfaced explicitly, which helps decide whether the paper is worth immediate prototyping.
Benchmark trust
Concrete benchmark findings are present and can be audited against the extracted evidence.
Use this page as
Use this page to audit benchmark claims and scope a cautious reproduction plan.
Results & Benchmarks
Benchmark evidence drill-down
Audit each benchmark finding before selecting an implementation path. Evidence refs map to the disclosure section below.
| Task | Dataset | Metric | Value | Source | Evidence refs |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Learning Efficient Reasoning Long Chain-of-thought Llms | GPQA | Accuracy | 5668 | llm-grounded | researcherSummary.benchmarkSnapshot[0]paper.abstract |
| Learning Efficient Reasoning Long Chain-of-thought Llms | Original | LiveMathBench | 0.71 | llm-grounded | researcherSummary.benchmarkSnapshot[1]paper.abstract |
Long chain-of-thought~(CoT) has become a dominant paradigm for enhancing the reasoning capability of large reasoning models~(LRMs); however, the performance gains often come with a substantial increase in reasoning budget.
Implementation Evidence Summary
Recommendation evidence is currently too limited for a maintained-repo choice. Use Implementation Status and Reproduction Path for a practical baseline plan.
Reproduction Risks
- Estimate is based on paper-only reproduction flow
Hardware Notes
Expect multi-day setup/compute for meaningful reproduction based on current guidance.
Evidence disclosure
Evidence graph: 3 refs, 2 links.
Utility signals: depth 95/100, grounding 78/100, status high.
Implementation Status
There is no verified maintained implementation yet. Use this baseline plan to decide whether to prototype now or defer.
- No direct maintained implementation was found. Use the paper PDF and citation graph to design a baseline reproduction.
- Track assumptions and missing details in an experiment log before coding.
What is known right now
This page is not strong enough for a full AI-written research brief yet, so the summary is reduced to what is evidenced, what is missing, and what to do next.
What is known
- Long chain-of-thought~(CoT) has become a dominant paradigm for enhancing the reasoning capability of large reasoning models~(LRMs); however, the performance gains often come with a substantial increase in reasoning budget.
- Benchmark anchor: Learning Efficient Reasoning Long Chain-of-thought Llms on Original using LiveMathBench.
What is missing
- Benchmark evidence is not yet strong enough to treat the LLM brief as fully researcher-ready.
- There is no verified maintained implementation path yet.
What to do next
- No direct maintained implementation was found. Use the paper PDF and citation graph to design a baseline reproduction.
- Track assumptions and missing details in an experiment log before coding.
Reproduction path
Follow this baseline workflow to decide if this paper is worth immediate prototyping.
- 1
Use the paper and benchmark evidence to scope a baseline reproduction plan.
- 2
Track assumptions and missing details in an experiment log before coding.
Hugging Face artifacts
No direct paper-linked artifacts were found. Showing strongest curated related artifacts for faster exploration.
Models
- Jackrong/Qwen3.5-27B-Claude-4.6-Opus-Reasoning-Distilled-GGUF Curated RelatedDownloads: 20,531Likes: 102
- microsoft/Phi-4-reasoning-vision-15B Curated RelatedDownloads: 9,545Likes: 106
Broaden model search
Datasets
No trustworthy dataset matches right now.
Search datasets on Hugging FaceSpaces
No trustworthy demo spaces right now.
Search spaces on Hugging FaceResearch context
Tasks
Learning Efficient Reasoning Long Chain-of-thought Llms
Methods
None detected
Domains
None detected
Evaluation & Human Feedback Data
Open this paper in HFEPX to review benchmark signals, evaluation modes, and human-feedback protocol context.
Open in HFEPXExplore Similar Papers
Jump to Paper2Code search queries derived from this paper's research context.
Need human evaluators for your AI research? Scale annotation with expert AI Trainers.