Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This paper introduces a verifier-free breadth-depth refinement framework that enhances LLM reasoning by employing test-time compute to explore and improve candidate solutions through iterative self-critique and self-correction. By sampling multiple independent reasoning rollouts and aggregating refined answers via majority voting, the method effectively preserves diverse initial attempts while correcting local reasoning errors. The approach outperforms traditional methods, achieving significant accuracy improvements on benchmarks like MATH500 and AMC, demonstrating that refining trajectories can be more beneficial than merely increasing sample size or relying on external verifier models.
Test-time self-correction can boost LLM accuracy by over 30% on challenging reasoning tasks without the need for external reward models.
Test-time scaling improves LLM reasoning by using additional inference compute, but wider sampling alone can suffer from diminishing returns: new rollouts often repeat existing answer patterns instead of adding useful reasoning diversity. Verifier-based selection offers an alternative, but its performance depends on the calibration of an external reward model. We propose a verifier-free breadth--depth refinement framework that uses test-time compute to both explore and improve candidate solutions. The method samples multiple independent reasoning rollouts, refines each rollout through iterative self-critique and self-correction, and aggregates the refined answers by majority voting. Breadth preserves diverse initial attempts, while depth repairs local reasoning errors before aggregation. Across AIME24, AIME25, AMC, OlympiadBench, and MATH500, our method consistently improves over greedy decoding, majority voting, verifier-based best-of-$N$, beam search, and lookahead decoding across multiple open-weight models. For instance, with Qwen2.5-1.5B, accuracy increases from the strongest verifier-based baseline to $58.0\%$ on MATH500, and from $25.0\%$ to $32.5\%$ on AMC. These results show that test-time compute can be more effective when used to refine sampled trajectories rather than only to sample more candidates or rely on verifier-guided selection.
Stanford HAI