@inproceedings{xiang-etal-2026-thinking,
title = "When Is Thinking Enough? Early Exit via Sufficiency Assessment for Efficient Reasoning",
author = "Xiang, Yang and
Ji, Yixin and
Xu, Ruotao and
Qiao, Dan and
Yang, Zheming and
Li, Juntao and
Zhang, Min",
editor = "Liakata, Maria and
Moreira, Viviane P. and
Zhang, Jiajun and
Jurgens, David",
booktitle = "Proceedings of the 64th Annual Meeting of the {A}ssociation for {C}omputational {L}inguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers)",
month = jul,
year = "2026",
address = "San Diego, California, United States",
publisher = "Association for Computational Linguistics",
url = "https://aclanthology.org/2026.acl-long.1080/",
pages = "23541--23556",
ISBN = "979-8-89176-390-6",
abstract = "Large reasoning models (LRMs) have achieved remarkable performance in complex reasoning tasks, driven by their powerful inference-time scaling capability.However, LRMs often suffer from overthinking, which results in substantial computational redundancy and significantly reduces efficiency.Early-exit methods aim to mitigate this issue by terminating reasoning once sufficient evidence has been generated, yet existing approaches mostly rely on handcrafted or empirical indicators that are unreliable and impractical.In this work, we introduce Dynamic Thought Sufficiency in Reasoning (DTSR), a novel framework for efficient reasoning that enables the model to dynamically assess the sufficiency of its chain-of-thought (CoT) and determine the optimal point for early exit.Inspired by human metacognition, DTSR operates in two stages: (1) Reflection Signal Monitoring, which identifies reflection signals as potential cues for early exit, and (2) Thought Sufficiency Check, which evaluates whether the current CoT is sufficient to derive the final answer.Experimental results on the Qwen3 models show that DTSR reduces reasoning length by 28.9{\%}{--}34.9{\%} with minimal performance loss, effectively mitigating overthinking.We further discuss overconfidence in LRMs and self-evaluation paradigms, providing valuable insights for early-exit reasoning."
}<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<modsCollection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
<mods ID="xiang-etal-2026-thinking">
<titleInfo>
<title>When Is Thinking Enough? Early Exit via Sufficiency Assessment for Efficient Reasoning</title>
</titleInfo>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Yang</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Xiang</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Yixin</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Ji</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Ruotao</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Xu</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Dan</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Qiao</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Zheming</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Yang</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Juntao</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Li</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Min</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Zhang</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<originInfo>
<dateIssued>2026-07</dateIssued>
</originInfo>
<typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource>
<relatedItem type="host">
<titleInfo>
<title>Proceedings of the 64th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers)</title>
</titleInfo>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Maria</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Liakata</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Viviane</namePart>
<namePart type="given">P</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Moreira</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Jiajun</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Zhang</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">David</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Jurgens</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<originInfo>
<publisher>Association for Computational Linguistics</publisher>
<place>
<placeTerm type="text">San Diego, California, United States</placeTerm>
</place>
</originInfo>
<genre authority="marcgt">conference publication</genre>
<identifier type="isbn">979-8-89176-390-6</identifier>
</relatedItem>
<abstract>Large reasoning models (LRMs) have achieved remarkable performance in complex reasoning tasks, driven by their powerful inference-time scaling capability.However, LRMs often suffer from overthinking, which results in substantial computational redundancy and significantly reduces efficiency.Early-exit methods aim to mitigate this issue by terminating reasoning once sufficient evidence has been generated, yet existing approaches mostly rely on handcrafted or empirical indicators that are unreliable and impractical.In this work, we introduce Dynamic Thought Sufficiency in Reasoning (DTSR), a novel framework for efficient reasoning that enables the model to dynamically assess the sufficiency of its chain-of-thought (CoT) and determine the optimal point for early exit.Inspired by human metacognition, DTSR operates in two stages: (1) Reflection Signal Monitoring, which identifies reflection signals as potential cues for early exit, and (2) Thought Sufficiency Check, which evaluates whether the current CoT is sufficient to derive the final answer.Experimental results on the Qwen3 models show that DTSR reduces reasoning length by 28.9%–34.9% with minimal performance loss, effectively mitigating overthinking.We further discuss overconfidence in LRMs and self-evaluation paradigms, providing valuable insights for early-exit reasoning.</abstract>
<identifier type="citekey">xiang-etal-2026-thinking</identifier>
<location>
<url>https://aclanthology.org/2026.acl-long.1080/</url>
</location>
<part>
<date>2026-07</date>
<extent unit="page">
<start>23541</start>
<end>23556</end>
</extent>
</part>
</mods>
</modsCollection>
%0 Conference Proceedings
%T When Is Thinking Enough? Early Exit via Sufficiency Assessment for Efficient Reasoning
%A Xiang, Yang
%A Ji, Yixin
%A Xu, Ruotao
%A Qiao, Dan
%A Yang, Zheming
%A Li, Juntao
%A Zhang, Min
%Y Liakata, Maria
%Y Moreira, Viviane P.
%Y Zhang, Jiajun
%Y Jurgens, David
%S Proceedings of the 64th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers)
%D 2026
%8 July
%I Association for Computational Linguistics
%C San Diego, California, United States
%@ 979-8-89176-390-6
%F xiang-etal-2026-thinking
%X Large reasoning models (LRMs) have achieved remarkable performance in complex reasoning tasks, driven by their powerful inference-time scaling capability.However, LRMs often suffer from overthinking, which results in substantial computational redundancy and significantly reduces efficiency.Early-exit methods aim to mitigate this issue by terminating reasoning once sufficient evidence has been generated, yet existing approaches mostly rely on handcrafted or empirical indicators that are unreliable and impractical.In this work, we introduce Dynamic Thought Sufficiency in Reasoning (DTSR), a novel framework for efficient reasoning that enables the model to dynamically assess the sufficiency of its chain-of-thought (CoT) and determine the optimal point for early exit.Inspired by human metacognition, DTSR operates in two stages: (1) Reflection Signal Monitoring, which identifies reflection signals as potential cues for early exit, and (2) Thought Sufficiency Check, which evaluates whether the current CoT is sufficient to derive the final answer.Experimental results on the Qwen3 models show that DTSR reduces reasoning length by 28.9%–34.9% with minimal performance loss, effectively mitigating overthinking.We further discuss overconfidence in LRMs and self-evaluation paradigms, providing valuable insights for early-exit reasoning.
%U https://aclanthology.org/2026.acl-long.1080/
%P 23541-23556
Markdown (Informal)
[When Is Thinking Enough? Early Exit via Sufficiency Assessment for Efficient Reasoning](https://aclanthology.org/2026.acl-long.1080/) (Xiang et al., ACL 2026)
ACL
- Yang Xiang, Yixin Ji, Ruotao Xu, Dan Qiao, Zheming Yang, Juntao Li, and Min Zhang. 2026. When Is Thinking Enough? Early Exit via Sufficiency Assessment for Efficient Reasoning. In Proceedings of the 64th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers), pages 23541–23556, San Diego, California, United States. Association for Computational Linguistics.