Skip to content
← Back to explorer

Unlocking the Working Memory of Large Language Models for Latent Reasoning

Lukas Aichberger, Sepp Hochreiter · May 28, 2026 · Citations: 0

How to use this page

Low trust

Use this as background context only. Do not make protocol decisions from this page alone.

Best use

Background context only

What to verify

Read the full paper before copying any benchmark, metric, or protocol choices.

Evidence quality

Low

Derived from extracted protocol signals and abstract evidence.

Abstract

To improve the reasoning capabilities of large language models, test-time compute is typically scaled by generating intermediate tokens before the final answer. However, this couples reasoning to autoregressive generation and thereby conflates internal computation with external communication. In contrast, human cognition can use working memory to hold and manipulate information internally without the need to externalize intermediate thoughts. Drawing on this principle, we introduce Reasoning in Memory (RiM), a latent reasoning method that replaces the autoregressive generation of reasoning steps with memory blocks. These memory blocks are fixed sequences of special tokens that unlock the working-memory capacity of large language models. Since they are fixed rather than generated, they can be processed in a single forward pass, enabling compute-efficient latent reasoning. To operationalize these memory blocks, we employ a two-stage curriculum. First, we ground them by predicting explicit reasoning steps after each memory block. Second, we discard this step-level supervision and iteratively refine the final answer after each memory block. Our experiments on reasoning benchmarks show that, across language models of different families and sizes, RiM matches or exceeds existing latent reasoning methods while avoiding the autoregressive generation of thoughts. These results demonstrate that large language models can be trained to use working memory as an effective mechanism for latent reasoning.

Abstract-only analysis — low confidence

All signals on this page are inferred from the abstract only and may be inaccurate. Do not use this page as a primary protocol reference.

  • This paper looks adjacent to evaluation work, but not like a strong protocol reference.
  • The available metadata is too thin to trust this as a primary source.
  • The abstract does not clearly describe the evaluation setup.
  • The abstract does not clearly name benchmarks or metrics.

Should You Rely On This Paper?

This paper is adjacent to HFEPX scope and is best used for background context, not as a primary protocol reference.

Best use

Background context only

Use if you need

Background context only.

Main weakness

This paper looks adjacent to evaluation work, but not like a strong protocol reference.

Trust level

Low

Usefulness score

0/100 • Low

Treat as adjacent context, not a core eval-method reference.

Human Feedback Signal

Not explicit in abstract metadata

Evaluation Signal

Weak / implicit signal

Usefulness for eval research

Adjacent candidate

Extraction confidence 15%

What We Could Verify

These are the protocol signals we could actually recover from the available paper metadata. Use them to decide whether this paper is worth deeper reading.

Human Feedback Types

missing

None explicit

No explicit feedback protocol extracted.

"To improve the reasoning capabilities of large language models, test-time compute is typically scaled by generating intermediate tokens before the final answer."

Evaluation Modes

missing

None explicit

Validate eval design from full paper text.

"To improve the reasoning capabilities of large language models, test-time compute is typically scaled by generating intermediate tokens before the final answer."

Quality Controls

missing

Not reported

No explicit QC controls found.

"To improve the reasoning capabilities of large language models, test-time compute is typically scaled by generating intermediate tokens before the final answer."

Benchmarks / Datasets

missing

Not extracted

No benchmark anchors detected.

"To improve the reasoning capabilities of large language models, test-time compute is typically scaled by generating intermediate tokens before the final answer."

Reported Metrics

missing

Not extracted

No metric anchors detected.

"To improve the reasoning capabilities of large language models, test-time compute is typically scaled by generating intermediate tokens before the final answer."

Human Feedback Details

  • Uses human feedback: No
  • Feedback types: None
  • Rater population: Not reported
  • Expertise required: General

Evaluation Details

  • Evaluation modes:
  • Agentic eval: None
  • Quality controls: Not reported
  • Evidence quality: Low
  • Use this page as: Background context only

Protocol And Measurement Signals

Benchmarks / Datasets

No benchmark or dataset names were extracted from the available abstract.

Reported Metrics

No metric terms were extracted from the available abstract.

Research Brief

Metadata summary

To improve the reasoning capabilities of large language models, test-time compute is typically scaled by generating intermediate tokens before the final answer.

Based on abstract + metadata only. Check the source paper before making high-confidence protocol decisions.

Key Takeaways

  • To improve the reasoning capabilities of large language models, test-time compute is typically scaled by generating intermediate tokens before the final answer.
  • However, this couples reasoning to autoregressive generation and thereby conflates internal computation with external communication.
  • In contrast, human cognition can use working memory to hold and manipulate information internally without the need to externalize intermediate thoughts.

Researcher Actions

  • Compare this paper against nearby papers in the same arXiv category before using it for protocol decisions.
  • Check the full text for explicit evaluation design choices (raters, protocol, and metrics).
  • Use related-paper links to find stronger protocol-specific references.

Caveats

  • Generated from abstract + metadata only; no PDF parsing.
  • Signals below are heuristic and may miss details reported outside the abstract.

Recommended Queries

Research Summary

Contribution Summary

  • In contrast, human cognition can use working memory to hold and manipulate information internally without the need to externalize intermediate thoughts.
  • Drawing on this principle, we introduce Reasoning in Memory (RiM), a latent reasoning method that replaces the autoregressive generation of reasoning steps with memory blocks.
  • Our experiments on reasoning benchmarks show that, across language models of different families and sizes, RiM matches or exceeds existing latent reasoning methods while avoiding the autoregressive generation of thoughts.

Why It Matters For Eval

  • In contrast, human cognition can use working memory to hold and manipulate information internally without the need to externalize intermediate thoughts.
  • Our experiments on reasoning benchmarks show that, across language models of different families and sizes, RiM matches or exceeds existing latent reasoning methods while avoiding the autoregressive generation of thoughts.

Researcher Checklist

  • Gap: Human feedback protocol is explicit

    No explicit human feedback protocol detected.

  • Gap: Evaluation mode is explicit

    No clear evaluation mode extracted.

  • Gap: Quality control reporting appears

    No calibration/adjudication/IAA control explicitly detected.

  • Gap: Benchmark or dataset anchors are present

    No benchmark/dataset anchor extracted from abstract.

  • Gap: Metric reporting is present

    No metric terms extracted.

Related Papers

Papers are ranked by protocol overlap, extraction signal alignment, and semantic proximity.

No related papers found for this item yet.

Get Started

Join the #1 Platform for AI Training Talent

Where top AI builders and expert AI Trainers connect to build the future of AI.
Self-Service
Post a Job
Post your project and get a shortlist of qualified AI Trainers and Data Labelers. Hire and manage your team in the tools you already use.
Managed Service
For Large Projects
Done-for-You
We recruit, onboard, and manage a dedicated team inside your tools. End-to-end operations for large or complex projects.
For Freelancers
Join as an AI Trainer
Find AI training and data labeling projects across platforms, all in one place. One profile, one application process, more opportunities.