Inference-time scaling through multiple sample generation in combination with Process- or Outcome-Reward Model (PRM or ORM) re-ranking has proven effective for text-based reasoning in large language models. This paper investigates whether such established techniques can be successfully adapted to reasoning in the continuous space, using COCONUT (CITATION) continuous space reasoning LM as the backbone. We demonstrate the feasibility of generating diverse reasoning paths through dropout-based sampling. Our Pass@N analysis on the generated samples reveals the potential that could enable a significant gain in performance akin to gains observed in the discrete space. However, we highlight unique challenges faced for materializing this gain in the continuous thought space. In particular, working recipes for data generation and training PRM and ORM models in the discrete space unlocks only marginal improvements in the continuous space. Through probing various aspects including geometric properties and trajectory dynamics, we identify the underlying reasons that prevent effective discrimination between correct and incorrect reasoning (essential for the functioning of PRM and ORM). Our findings reveal that current limitations stem from the absence of key inductive biases in continuous thought representations.

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed as autonomous agents, yet evaluations focus primarily on task success rather than cultural appropriateness or evaluator reliability. We introduce LiveCultureBench, a multi-cultural, dynamic benchmark that embeds LLMs as agents in a simulated town and evaluates them on both task completion and adherence to socio-cultural norms. The simulation models a small city as a location graph with synthetic residents having diverse demographic and cultural profiles. Each episode assigns one resident a daily goal while others provide social context. An LLM-based verifier generates structured judgments on norm violations and task progress, which we aggregate into metrics capturing task-norm trade-offs and verifier uncertainty. Using LiveCultureBench across models and cultural profiles, we study (i) cross-cultural robustness of LLM agents, (ii) how they balance effectiveness against norm sensitivity, and (iii) when LLM-as-a-judge evaluation is reliable for automated benchmarking versus when human oversight is needed.