arXiv (All)
open access
Does Chain-of-Thought Reliance Follow a Scaling Law?Larger Models Follow Their Steps More, Independent of Post-Training
Monitoring a model's chain of thought (CoT) is useful for safety only if the final answer depends on the written steps. Prior measurements use natural tasks where true reasoning is unknown. We measure it against an exact ground truth on a synthetic box-swap task where every intermediate state is kno
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
- Monitorability Is Trainable: Post-Training for Chain-of-Thought Monitorability#1414339
- Monitorability Is Trainable: Post-Training for Chain-of-Thought Monitorability#1406474
- RIFT: Token Influence Follows the Path of Least Resistance#1327939
- Many Perturbations, Shared Failure Dynamics: Tracing Direction-Sensitive Perturbation Influence in Language Models#1447676
- The Reliance Hypothesis: Chain-of-Thought Faithfulness Rises as Language Resource Level Falls#1386810
Record · ID 1489225
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