Papers

Direct Pass@$k$ 优化:测试时推理剪枝中平衡质量与多样性

Direct Pass@$k$ Optimization for Thought Pruning: Balancing Quality and Diversity in Test-Time Reasoning

Why we picked it

一篇研究测试时推理剪枝的论文,把 pass@$k$ 直接当优化目标,在 8 个开源推理模型上比质量和多样性两类剪枝策略都强,做推理效率的可以看看。

测试时扩展中,模型会生成大量候选解答,但全部跑完计算开销大,常见做法是只看短前缀就剪枝。已有剪枝策略分为两类:基于质量的方法给部分解答打分并丢弃预测会出错的候选,基于多样性的方法则选择不同推理轨迹的候选。论文提出直接以 pass@$k$ 为目标优化候选池,最大化池中至少一个部分解答续写后得到正确答案的概率,由该目标本身同时奖励高质量、惩罚冗余,无需额外的临时设计。在 8 个开源权重推理模型上,该方法超过了现有的质量类与多样性类剪枝策略,且在保留中等数量部分解答时提升最明显。

Original · arXiv cs.AI

Direct Pass@$k$ Optimization for Thought Pruning: Balancing Quality and Diversity in Test-Time Reasoning

Test-time scaling has emerged as a key inference strategy for reasoning models, where a model generates a large number of candidate solutions in the hope of finding at least one correct solution. Running all candidate solutions to completion can be computationally demanding, so recent work prunes the candidate pool after generating only a short prefix, committing further computation only to the surviving candidates. Existing pruning strategies divide broadly into two categories: Quality-based methods assign a score to each partial solution and discard those predicted to ultimately lead to an incorrect final solution, while diversity-based methods select partial solutions that follow different reasoning trajectories and are therefore likely to cover different final solutions. The tension between these two objectives is an instance of exploration versus exploitation, yet little to no prior work on pruning exposes this trade-off directly, let alone optimizes it. In this paper, we introduce a pruning procedure that addresses this trade-off directly by optimizing pass@$k$ over the selected solution pool. In particular, it chooses the pool to maximize the probability that at least one of its partial solutions, when continued to completion, yields a correct answer. Because this objective simultaneously rewards high-quality partial solutions and penalizes redundancy among them, quality and diversity are naturally balanced by the criterion itself rather than through separate ad-hoc design choices. On eight open-weight reasoning models, our method outperforms existing quality-based and diversity-based pruning strategies. The gains are particularly pronounced when the pruning procedure keeps a moderate number of partial solutions for continued generation, highlighting the value of directly balancing quality and diversity during pruning.