Think Anywhere in Code Generation
Think-Anywhere is a novel reasoning mechanism that enables large language models to invoke thinking on-demand during code generation, improving performance across multiple benchmarks through adaptive reasoning allocation. (0 upvotes on HuggingFace)
Published on Mar 31
Authors:
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
Abstract
Think-Anywhere is a novel reasoning mechanism that enables large language models to invoke thinking on-demand during code generation, improving performance across multiple benchmarks through adaptive reasoning allocation.
AI-generated summary
Recent advances in reasoning Large Language Models (LLMs) have primarily relied on upfront thinking, where reasoning occurs before final answer. However, this approach suffers from critical limitations in code generation, where upfront thinking is often insufficient as problems' full complexity only reveals itself during code implementation. Moreover, it cannot adaptively allocate reasoning effort throughout the code generation process where difficulty varies significantly. In this paper, we propose Think-Anywhere, a novel reasoning mechanism that enables LLMs to invoke thinking on-demand at any token position during code generation. We achieve Think-Anywhere by first teaching LLMs to imitate the reasoning patterns through cold-start training, then leveraging outcome-based RL rewards to drive the model's autonomous exploration of when and where to invoke reasoning. Extensive experiments on four mainstream code generation benchmarks (i.e., LeetCode, LiveCodeBench, HumanEval, and MBPP) show that Think-Anywhere achieves state-of-the-art performance over both existing reasoning methods and recent post-training approaches, while demonstrating consistent generalization across diverse LLMs. Our analysis further reveals that Think-Anywhere enables the model to adaptively invoke reasoning at high-entropy positions, providing enhanced interpretability.
View arXiv page View PDF GitHub Add to collection
Get this paper in your agent:
hf papers read 2603.29957
Don't have the latest CLI?
curl -LsSf https://hf.co/cli/install.sh | bash
Models citing this paper 0
No model linking this paper
Cite arxiv.org/abs/2603.29957 in a model README.md to link it from this page.
Datasets citing this paper 0
No dataset linking this paper
Cite arxiv.org/abs/2603.29957 in a dataset README.md to link it from this page.
Spaces citing this paper 0
No Space linking this paper
Cite arxiv.org/abs/2603.29957 in a Space README.md to link it from this page.
Collections including this paper 0
No Collection including this paper
Add this paper to a collection to link it from this page.
Sign in to highlight and annotate this article

Conversation starters
Daily AI Digest
Get the top 5 AI stories delivered to your inbox every morning.
More about
researchpaperarxiv
Is Turboquant really a game changer?
I am currently utilizing qwen3.5 and Gemma 4 model. Realized Gemma 4 requires 2x ram for same context length. As far as I understand, what turbo quant gives is quantizing kv cache into about 4 bit and minimize the loses But Q8 still not lose the context that much so isn't kv cache ram for qwen 3.5 q8 and Gemma 4 truboquant is the same? Is turboquant also applicable in qwen's cache architecture? because as far as I know they didn't tested it in qwen3.5 style kv cache in their paper. Just curious, I started to learn local LLM recently submitted by /u/Interesting-Print366 [link] [comments]

Found how to toggle reasoning mode for Gemma in LM-Studio!
I’ve figured out how to trigger the reasoning process by adding "/think" to the system prompt. Heads up: the thought tags have an unusual pipe ( | ) placement, which is why many LLM fail to parse the reasoning section correctly. So Start String is : " thought" And End String is " " Here is the Jinja template: https://pastebin.com/MGmD8UiC Tested and working with the 26B and 31B versions. submitted by /u/Adventurous-Paper566 [link] [comments]

AI companions can comfort lonely users but may deepen distress over time
AI companions are always available, never judge, never tire and never demand anything in return. If someone is struggling with loneliness, this frictionlessness can seem profoundly appealing. However, new research shows that in the long term, seeking emotional support from an AI companion can pull users away from important human relationships.
Knowledge Map
Connected Articles — Knowledge Graph
This article is connected to other articles through shared AI topics and tags.
More in Research Papers

New Rowhammer attack can grant kernel-level control on Nvidia workstation GPUs
A study from researchers at UNC Chapel Hill and Georgia Tech shows that GDDR6-based Rowhammer attacks can grant kernel-level access to Linux systems equipped with GPUs based on Nvidia's Ampere and Ada Lovelace architectures. The vulnerability appears significantly more severe than what was outlined in a paper last year. Read Entire Article
![[D] ICML Reviewer Acknowledgement](https://d2xsxph8kpxj0f.cloudfront.net/310419663032563854/konzwo8nGf8Z4uZsMefwMr/default-img-matrix-rain-CvjLrWJiXfamUnvj5xT9J9.webp)
[D] ICML Reviewer Acknowledgement
Hi, I'm a little confused about ICML discussion period Does the period for reviewer acknowledging responses have already ended? One of the four reviewers did not present any answer to a paper of mine. Do you know if the reviewer can still change their score before April 7th? There is a reviewer comment that I will answer on Monday. Will the reviewer be able to update the score after seeing my answer? Thanks! submitted by /u/Massive_Horror9038 [link] [comments]

Considerations for growing the pie
Recently some friends and I were comparing growing the pie interventions to an increasing our friends' share of the pie intervention, and at first we mostly missed some general considerations against the latter type. 1. Decision-theoretic considerations The world is full of people with different values working towards their own ends; each of them can choose to use their resources to increase the total size of the pie or to increase their share of the pie. All of them would significantly prefer a world in which resources were used to increase the size of the pie, and this leads to a number [of] compelling justifications for each individual to cooperate. . . . by increasing the size of the pie we create a world which is better for people on average, and from behind the veil of ignorance we s


Discussion
Sign in to join the discussion
No comments yet — be the first to share your thoughts!