RL of Thoughts: Navigating LLM Reasoning with Inference-time Reinforcement Learning
Qianyue Hao, Sibo Li, Jian Yuan, Yong Li
Abstract
Despite rapid advancements in large language models (LLMs), the token-level autoregressive nature constrains their complex reasoning capabilities. To enhance LLM reasoning, inference-time techniques, including Chain/Tree/Graph-of-Thought(s), successfully improve the performance, as they are fairly cost-effective by guiding reasoning through external logical structures without modifying LLMs' parameters. However, these manually predefined, task-agnostic frameworks are applied uniformly across diverse tasks, lacking adaptability. To improve this, we propose RL-of-Thoughts (RLoT), where we train a lightweight navigator model with reinforcement learning (RL) to generate task-adaptive logical structures at inference time, enhancing LLM reasoning. Specifically, we design five basic logic blocks from the perspective of human cognition. During the reasoning process, the trained RL navigator dynamically selects the suitable logic blocks and combines them into task-specific logical structures according to problem characteristics. Experiments across multiple reasoning benchmarks (AIME, MATH, GPQA, etc.) with multiple LLMs (GPT, Llama, Qwen, and DeepSeek) illustrate that RLoT outperforms established inference-time techniques in most cases and improves up to 13.4% in challenging situations. Remarkably, with less than 3K parameters, our RL navigator is able to make sub-10B LLMs comparable to 100B-scale counterparts. Moreover, the RL navigator demonstrates strong transferability: a model trained on one specific LLM-task pair can effectively generalize to unseen LLMs and tasks. Our code is open-source at https://github.com/tsinghua-fib-lab/RL-LLM-Reasoning . INTRODUCTION Recent years have witnessed unprecedented advancements in large language models (LLMs), achieving remarkable success across diverse natural language tasks (Chang et al., 2024), including translation (Xu et al., 2024) , semantic analysis (Lan et al., 2024b;a), and information retrieval (Hao et al., 2024) . Despite these advancements, the inherent token-level autoregressive nature of LLMs poses a significant limitation for complex reasoning tasks (Zhao et al., 2023), such as solving mathematical problems (Ahn et al., 2024) or answering intricate questions (Zhuang et al., 2023) . These tasks require sophisticated logical structures and long-term dependencies that go beyond the scope of simple sequential token prediction, leaving a considerable gap between current LLM capabilities and the demands of advanced reasoning applications. Plentiful research has been devoted to enhancing LLM reasoning. On one hand, fine-tuning approaches attain substantial improvements on pretrained LLMs (Zhong et al., 2024; DeepSeek-AI et al., 2025; Team et al., 2025) . However, these methods demand massive computational resources and large-scale datasets, being costly to implement. On the other hand, inference-time techniques, exemplified by Chain-of-Thought (Wei et al., 2022), Tree-of-Thoughts (Yao et al., 2023), and Graphof-Thoughts (Besta et al., 2024), offer a lightweight alternative by enhancing reasoning through predefined external logical structures. While cost-effective, their logical structures rely on manual design and are task-agnostic, lacking the adaptability to diverse reasoning tasks. Addressing such limitations in inference-time techniques presents significant challenges. First, reasoning tasks span various domains, including mathematics, STEM, commonsense, etc., where
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.
Cited by top-tier papers2
- Achieving Olympia-Level Geometry Large Language Model Agent via Complexity Boosting Reinforcement LearningHaiteng Zhao, Junhao Shen, Yiming Zhang, Songyang Gao et al.ICLR 2026 · 2 citations
- What Characterizes Effective Reasoning? Revisiting Length, Review, and Structure of CoTYunzhen Feng, Julia Kempe, Cheng Zhang, Parag Jain et al.ICML 2026
Builds on20
- Language Models are Few-Shot LearnersTom B. Brown, Benjamin Mann, Nick Ryder, Melanie Subbiah et al.NeurIPS 2020 · 64,255 citations
- Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackLong Ouyang, Jeffrey Wu, Xu Jiang, Diogo Almeida et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 24,707 citations
- Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language ModelsJason Wei, Xuezhi Wang, Dale Schuurmans, Maarten Bosma et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 22,562 citations
- Measuring Massive Multitask Language UnderstandingDan Hendrycks, Collin Burns, Steven Basart, Andy Zou et al.ICLR 2021 · 7,905 citations
- Tree of Thoughts: Deliberate Problem Solving with Large Language ModelsShunyu Yao, Dian Yu, Jeffrey Zhao, Izhak Shafran et al.NeurIPS 2023 · 5,068 citations
Related papers
- Reversal of Thought: Enhancing Large Language Models with Preference-Guided Reverse Reasoning Warm-upJiahao Yuan, Dehui Du, Hao Zhang, Zixiang Di et al.ACL 2025 · 12 citations
- Adaption-of-Thought: Learning Question Difficulty Improves Large Language Models for ReasoningMayi Xu, Yongqi Li, Ke Sun, Tieyun QianEMNLP 2024 · 1 citation
- ReaGEN: Adaptive Generation of Structured Chains-of-Thought for Efficient Multimodal ReasoningRuiqing Tian, Mohan Sai Singamsetti, Di Niu, Bahador RashidiCVPR 2026
- Training Language Models to Reason EfficientlyDaman Arora, Andrea ZanetteNeurIPS 2025 · 270 citations
- How Do Humans Write Code? Large Models Do It the Same Way TooLong Li, Xuzheng He, Haozhe Wang, Linlin Wang et al.EMNLP 2024 · 1 citation
