Papers
arxiv:2605.17026

Why Do Reasoning Models Lose Coverage? The Role of Data and Forks in the Road

Published on May 16
· Submitted by
Parshin Shojaee
on May 20
Authors:
,
,
,
,
,

Abstract

Reasoning models exhibit coverage shrinkage during supervised fine-tuning due to decision-point scenarios in training data, which can be mitigated through targeted data synthesis and diversity-encouraging decoding mechanisms.

AI-generated summary

Recent progress in large language models has led to the emergence of reasoning models, which have shown strong performance on complex tasks through specialized fine-tuning procedures. While these methods reliably improve pass@1 accuracy, prior works have observed that they show a coverage shrinkage behavior, where pass@k degrades relative to the base model. In this paper, we investigate the reasoning shrinkage arise under SFT-based post-training. We hypothesize that this behavior is driven by properties of the fine-tuning data, specifically related to decision points or "forks in the road" scenarios where model faces indecipherable patterns with multiple valid reasoning paths. To test this hypothesis, we design controlled case studies that simulate such decision-point settings, spanning indecipherable nodes in graph branching, and reasoning modes. By tracking post-training dynamics in these settings, we find that the shrinkage phenomenon is tightly correlated with the prevalence of decision-point scenarios in the training data. We also demonstrate that this shrinkage behavior can be partially mitigated through targeted data synthesis design of decision-points, and a more systematic diversity-encouraging decoding mechanism. Our findings identify data-centric factors as a key driver of shrinkage in reasoning models and highlight diversity-aware designs as an effective lever for controlling it.

Community

Paper author Paper submitter

motiv

Why Do Reasoning Models Lose Coverage?
We revisit this open question with a data-centric lens , and show how “forks in the road” situations in the post-training data can shape—and shrink—model coverage

Sign up or log in to comment

Get this paper in your agent:

hf papers read 2605.17026
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/2605.17026 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/2605.17026 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/2605.17026 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.