arXiv (All)
open access
Correct Answers, Invalid Traces: What Verifiable Grade-School Math Reveals About Chain-of-Thought Traces
Chain-of-thought traces are widely read as records of how models reach their answers, informing debugging, agent auditing, and claims about reasoning. Testing this interpretation is difficult because natural-language thinking traces are rarely mechanically verifiable. We revisit it in iGSM, a synthe
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- Correct Answers, Invalid Traces: What Verifiable Grade-School Math Reveals About Chain-of-Thought Traces#1122324
- Teaching Large Language Models to Self-Debug#16590
- ReasoningFlow: Discourse Structures for Understanding LLM Reasoning Traces#999804
- TraceGuard: Process-Guided Firewall against Reasoning Backdoors in Large Language Models#821795
- LogicTrack: Auditing Reasoning Trajectories of Large Language Models with Formal Logic Solvers#1035892
Record · ID 1142403
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive