Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This paper formalizes dynamic abstention in LLMs as a regularized reinforcement learning problem, where abstaining is modeled as an explicit action with an abstention reward parameter balancing compute and information. They prove that abstaining when the value function falls below this reward is strictly better than natural baselines. Empirically, they approximate the value function and show improved selective accuracy on mathematical reasoning and toxicity avoidance tasks compared to existing abstention methods.
LLMs can waste compute on incorrect reasoning, but this work shows how to provably and practically stop them mid-generation when they're going astray.
Large language models (LLMs) using chain-of-thought reasoning often waste substantial compute by producing long, incorrect responses. Abstention can mitigate this by withholding outputs unlikely to be correct. While most abstention methods decide to withhold outputs before or after generation, dynamic mid-generation abstention considers early termination of unpromising reasoning traces at each token position. Prior work has explored empirical variants of this idea, but principled guidance for the abstention rule remains lacking. We present a formal analysis of dynamic abstention for LLMs, modeling abstention as an explicit action within a regularized reinforcement learning framework. An abstention reward parameter controls the trade-off between compute and information. We show that abstaining when the value function falls below this reward strictly outperforms natural baselines under general conditions. We further derive a principled and efficient method to approximate the value function. Empirical results on mathematical reasoning and toxicity avoidance tasks support our theory and demonstrate improved selective accuracy over existing methods.
