From Reasoning to Answer: Empirical, Attention-Based and Mechanistic Insights into Distilled DeepSeek R1 Models
Jue Zhang, Qingwei Lin, Saravan Rajmohan, Dongmei Zhang
Abstract
Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) generate explicit reasoning traces alongside final answers, yet the extent to which these traces influence answer generation remains unclear. In this work, we conduct a three-stage investigation into the interplay between reasoning and answer generation in three distilled DeepSeek R1 models. First, through empirical evaluation, we demonstrate that including explicit reasoning consistently improves answer quality across diverse domains. Second, attention analysis reveals that answer tokens attend substantially to reasoning tokens, with certain midlayer Reasoning-Focus Heads (RFHs) closely tracking the reasoning trajectory, including selfreflective cues. Third, we apply mechanistic interventions using activation patching to assess the dependence of answer tokens on reasoning activations. Our results show that perturbations to key reasoning tokens can reliably alter the final answers, confirming a directional and functional flow of information from reasoning to answer. These findings deepen our understanding of how LRMs leverage reasoning tokens for answer generation, highlighting the functional role of intermediate reasoning in shaping model outputs. Investigation Directions Key Observations and Insights Empirical Study: Does Reasoning Improve Answer Quality? (Section 3) • Explicit reasoning improves answer quality across diverse domains. • Gains are more pronounced in distilled R1 models than in the full R1 model.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 5b916984-7340-4950-a22b-be866fc9fa7cCited by top-tier papers2
- Towards a Mechanistic Understanding of Large Reasoning Models: A Survey of Training, Inference, and FailuresYi Hu, Jiaqi Gu, Ruxin Wang, Zijun Yao et al.ACL 2026 · 5 citations
- Monitorability as a Free Gift: How RLVR Spontaneously Aligns ReasoningZidi Xiong, Shan Chen, Himabindu LakkarajuICML 2026 · 3 citations
Builds on16
- Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language ModelsJason Wei, Xuezhi Wang, Dale Schuurmans, Maarten Bosma et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 22,562 citations
- Locating and Editing Factual Associations in GPTKevin Meng, David Bau, Alex Andonian, Yonatan BelinkovNeurIPS 2022 · 3,415 citations
- Let's Verify Step by StepHunter Lightman, Vineet Kosaraju, Yuri Burda, Harrison Edwards et al.ICLR 2024 · 3,045 citations
- Language Models Don't Always Say What They Think: Unfaithful Explanations in Chain-of-Thought PromptingMiles Turpin, Julian Michael, Ethan Perez, Samuel R. BowmanNeurIPS 2023 · 1,792 citations
- Efficient Streaming Language Models with Attention SinksGuangxuan Xiao, Yuandong Tian, Beidi Chen, Song Han et al.ICLR 2024 · 1,714 citations
Related papers
- Learning When to Think: Shaping Adaptive Reasoning in R1-Style Models via Multi-Stage RLSongjun Tu, Jiahao Lin, Qichao Zhang, Xiangyu Tian et al.NeurIPS 2025 · 69 citations
- Mitigating Overthinking in Large Reasoning Models via Manifold SteeringYao Huang, Huanran Chen, Shouwei Ruan, Yichi Zhang et al.NeurIPS 2025 · 45 citations
- Demystifying Reasoning Dynamics with Mutual Information: Thinking Tokens are Information Peaks in LLM ReasoningChen Qian, Dongrui Liu, Haochen Wen, Zhen Bai et al.NeurIPS 2025 · 63 citations
- RFS-Guard: Detecting Reasoning Hallucinations via Cross-Phase Routing Focus in Large Reasoning ModelsZihang Liu, Zhouhua Fang, Hui Liu, Zhiwei Liu et al.ACL 2026
- How Should We Enhance the Safety of Large Reasoning Models: An Empirical StudyZhexin Zhang, Xian Qi Loye, Victor Shea-Jay Huang, Junxiao Yang et al.ACL 2026 · 20 citations
