Human Feedback Types
missingNone explicit
No explicit feedback protocol extracted.
"Large reasoning models (LRMs), such as OpenAI's o1 and DeepSeek-R1, harness test-time scaling to perform multi-step reasoning for complex problem-solving."
HFEPX · Eval paper review
Chongyu Fan, Yihua Zhang, Jinghan Jia, Alfred Hero +1 more
Published
Jun 4, 2025
Citations
0
Trust level
Low
Usefulness score
0/100 (Low)
Extraction confidence
30% (Low)
Derived from extracted protocol signals and abstract evidence.
Rater population
Not reported
Signals refreshed
Mar 7, 2026
This paper is adjacent to HFEPX scope and is best used for background context, not as a primary protocol reference.
Use this as background context only. Do not make protocol decisions from this page alone.
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.
Best use
Background context only
Use if you need
A secondary eval reference to pair with stronger protocol papers.
What to verify
Validate the evaluation procedure and quality controls in the full paper before operational use.
Main weakness
This paper looks adjacent to evaluation work, but not like a strong protocol reference.
Treat as adjacent context, not a core eval-method reference.
If you are doing eval pipeline work, start here
Large reasoning models (LRMs), such as OpenAI's o1 and DeepSeek-R1, harness test-time scaling to perform multi-step reasoning for complex problem-solving. This reasoning process, executed before producing final answers, is often guided by special juncture tokens that prompt self-evaluative reflection. These transition markers and reflective cues are referred to as "reflection tokens" (e.g., "wait", "but", "alternatively"). In this work, we treat reflection tokens as a "resource" and introduce the problem of resource allocation, aimed at improving the test-time compute performance of LRMs by adaptively regulating the frequency and placement of reflection tokens. Through empirical analysis, we show that both excessive and insufficient use of reflection tokens, referred to as over-reflection and under-reflection, can degrade model performance. To better understand this trade-off, we draw an analogy between reflection token usage and learning rate scheduling in optimization. Building on this insight, We propose cyclical reflection token scheduling (termed CyclicReflex), a training-free decoding strategy that dynamically modulates reflection token logits with a bidirectional, position-dependent triangular waveform, incurring no additional computation cost. Experiments on MATH500, AIME2024/2025, AMC2023, GPQA Diamond and LiveCodeBench demonstrate that CyclicReflex consistently improves performance across model sizes (1.5B-14B), outperforming standard decoding and recent approaches such as TIP (thought switching penalty) and S1. Codes are available at https://github.com/OPTML-Group/CyclicReflex.
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.
None explicit
No explicit feedback protocol extracted.
"Large reasoning models (LRMs), such as OpenAI's o1 and DeepSeek-R1, harness test-time scaling to perform multi-step reasoning for complex problem-solving."
None explicit
Validate eval design from full paper text.
"Large reasoning models (LRMs), such as OpenAI's o1 and DeepSeek-R1, harness test-time scaling to perform multi-step reasoning for complex problem-solving."
Not reported
No explicit QC controls found.
"Large reasoning models (LRMs), such as OpenAI's o1 and DeepSeek-R1, harness test-time scaling to perform multi-step reasoning for complex problem-solving."
MATH 500, GPQA, LiveCodeBench
Useful for quick benchmark comparison.
"Experiments on MATH500, AIME2024/2025, AMC2023, GPQA Diamond and LiveCodeBench demonstrate that CyclicReflex consistently improves performance across model sizes (1.5B-14B), outperforming standard decoding and recent approaches such as TIP (thought switching penalty) and S1."
Not extracted
No metric anchors detected.
"Large reasoning models (LRMs), such as OpenAI's o1 and DeepSeek-R1, harness test-time scaling to perform multi-step reasoning for complex problem-solving."
No metric terms were extracted from the available abstract.
Large reasoning models (LRMs), such as OpenAI's o1 and DeepSeek-R1, harness test-time scaling to perform multi-step reasoning for complex problem-solving.
Based on abstract + metadata only. Check the source paper before making high-confidence protocol decisions.
Human feedback protocol is explicit
No explicit human feedback protocol detected.
Evaluation mode is explicit
No clear evaluation mode extracted.
Quality control reporting appears
No calibration/adjudication/IAA control explicitly detected.
Benchmark or dataset anchors are present
Detected: MATH-500, GPQA, LiveCodeBench
Metric reporting is present
No metric terms extracted.