@inproceedings{zhao-etal-2026-aha,
title = "Can Aha Moments be Fake? Towards Quantifying Decorative and True Thinking in Chain-of-Thought",
author = "Zhao, Jiachen and
Sun, Yiyou and
Shi, Weiyan and
Song, Dawn",
editor = "Lee, Hung-Yi and
Dev, Sunipa and
Li, Jessy and
Elliott, Desmond",
booktitle = "Findings of the {A}ssociation for {C}omputational {L}inguistics: {EMNLP} 2026",
month = oct,
year = "2026",
address = "Budapest, Hungary",
publisher = "Association for Computational Linguistics",
url = "https://aclanthology.org/2026.findings-emnlp.580/",
pages = "12242--12258",
ISBN = "979-8-89176-462-0",
abstract = "Large language models can generate long chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning, yet prior work suggests that CoT can be post-hoc rationalization rather than a faithful reflection of the computation through explicitly designed settings. In this work, we go further and propose a True Thinking Score (TTS) to quantify the causal contribution of each step in CoT to the model{'}s final prediction in realistic reasoning problems. Across eleven models ranging from 1.5B to 1.1T parameters on common reasoning benchmarks, we find that CoTs often interleave \textit{true-thinking} steps, which causally affect the final answer, with \textit{decorative-thinking} steps, which appear useful but have little causal influence; Such decorative steps remain prevalent even for frontier models: Over 30{\%} of steps in Kimi-K2.6 are decorative on MATH with TTS $\leq$ 0.005. Furthermore, TTS enables effective CoT pruning: removing 50{\%} of CoT steps with the lowest TTS can largely maintain the performance. Self-training on these pruned CoTs reduces reasoning length by 66{\%} while preserving performance on Nemotron3-Nano-30B. Finally, we provide a mechanistic analysis showing that LLMs can be steered in the latent space to engage or disengage with reasoning steps. Overall, our results reveal that frontier LLMs often verbalize reasoning steps that are not causally used, challenging both the efficiency and the trustworthiness of CoT."
}<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<modsCollection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
<mods ID="zhao-etal-2026-aha">
<titleInfo>
<title>Can Aha Moments be Fake? Towards Quantifying Decorative and True Thinking in Chain-of-Thought</title>
</titleInfo>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Jiachen</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Zhao</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Yiyou</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Sun</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Weiyan</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Shi</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Dawn</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Song</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<originInfo>
<dateIssued>2026-10</dateIssued>
</originInfo>
<typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource>
<relatedItem type="host">
<titleInfo>
<title>Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2026</title>
</titleInfo>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Hung-Yi</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Lee</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Sunipa</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Dev</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Jessy</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Li</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Desmond</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Elliott</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<originInfo>
<publisher>Association for Computational Linguistics</publisher>
<place>
<placeTerm type="text">Budapest, Hungary</placeTerm>
</place>
</originInfo>
<genre authority="marcgt">conference publication</genre>
<identifier type="isbn">979-8-89176-462-0</identifier>
</relatedItem>
<abstract>Large language models can generate long chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning, yet prior work suggests that CoT can be post-hoc rationalization rather than a faithful reflection of the computation through explicitly designed settings. In this work, we go further and propose a True Thinking Score (TTS) to quantify the causal contribution of each step in CoT to the model’s final prediction in realistic reasoning problems. Across eleven models ranging from 1.5B to 1.1T parameters on common reasoning benchmarks, we find that CoTs often interleave true-thinking steps, which causally affect the final answer, with decorative-thinking steps, which appear useful but have little causal influence; Such decorative steps remain prevalent even for frontier models: Over 30% of steps in Kimi-K2.6 are decorative on MATH with TTS łeq 0.005. Furthermore, TTS enables effective CoT pruning: removing 50% of CoT steps with the lowest TTS can largely maintain the performance. Self-training on these pruned CoTs reduces reasoning length by 66% while preserving performance on Nemotron3-Nano-30B. Finally, we provide a mechanistic analysis showing that LLMs can be steered in the latent space to engage or disengage with reasoning steps. Overall, our results reveal that frontier LLMs often verbalize reasoning steps that are not causally used, challenging both the efficiency and the trustworthiness of CoT.</abstract>
<identifier type="citekey">zhao-etal-2026-aha</identifier>
<location>
<url>https://aclanthology.org/2026.findings-emnlp.580/</url>
</location>
<part>
<date>2026-10</date>
<extent unit="page">
<start>12242</start>
<end>12258</end>
</extent>
</part>
</mods>
</modsCollection>
%0 Conference Proceedings
%T Can Aha Moments be Fake? Towards Quantifying Decorative and True Thinking in Chain-of-Thought
%A Zhao, Jiachen
%A Sun, Yiyou
%A Shi, Weiyan
%A Song, Dawn
%Y Lee, Hung-Yi
%Y Dev, Sunipa
%Y Li, Jessy
%Y Elliott, Desmond
%S Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2026
%D 2026
%8 October
%I Association for Computational Linguistics
%C Budapest, Hungary
%@ 979-8-89176-462-0
%F zhao-etal-2026-aha
%X Large language models can generate long chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning, yet prior work suggests that CoT can be post-hoc rationalization rather than a faithful reflection of the computation through explicitly designed settings. In this work, we go further and propose a True Thinking Score (TTS) to quantify the causal contribution of each step in CoT to the model’s final prediction in realistic reasoning problems. Across eleven models ranging from 1.5B to 1.1T parameters on common reasoning benchmarks, we find that CoTs often interleave true-thinking steps, which causally affect the final answer, with decorative-thinking steps, which appear useful but have little causal influence; Such decorative steps remain prevalent even for frontier models: Over 30% of steps in Kimi-K2.6 are decorative on MATH with TTS łeq 0.005. Furthermore, TTS enables effective CoT pruning: removing 50% of CoT steps with the lowest TTS can largely maintain the performance. Self-training on these pruned CoTs reduces reasoning length by 66% while preserving performance on Nemotron3-Nano-30B. Finally, we provide a mechanistic analysis showing that LLMs can be steered in the latent space to engage or disengage with reasoning steps. Overall, our results reveal that frontier LLMs often verbalize reasoning steps that are not causally used, challenging both the efficiency and the trustworthiness of CoT.
%U https://aclanthology.org/2026.findings-emnlp.580/
%P 12242-12258
Markdown (Informal)
[Can Aha Moments be Fake? Towards Quantifying Decorative and True Thinking in Chain-of-Thought](https://aclanthology.org/2026.findings-emnlp.580/) (Zhao et al., Findings 2026)
ACL