arXiv · 2610.19872
RCCM: Diagnosing Gains and Harms in Reasoning-Prompt Transfer
Abstract
A reasoning prompt can improve one deployment and degrade another. RCCM (Reasoning-Control Capability Mismatch) examines these reversals by pairing answers to the same questions with records of how generation ends. Across five open-weight deployments and nine strategies, aggregate accuracy hides substantial question-level gains and harms; a common-budget MATH500 evaluation examines transfer on a separate sample. On 60 additional questions, concise reasoning improves Phi's automatic answer matching at a 2,048-token cap across three collections, but sharply reduces Qwen's. Author-reviewed final-answer commitments give a smaller, statistically unresolved Phi gain. Reserving an answer stage also improves matching, with additional input and call costs. These results show why a prompt benefit must be interpreted alongside its execution and evaluation: matching a reference answer need not mean delivering it, and an apparent compression benefit may admit another explanation. RCCM records this evidence for reproducible transfer comparisons.
Explore related subjects
Keep this discovery
Explore connections, maps & timelines
Yuqi Zhang, Di Zhang. 2026-10-14. RCCM: Diagnosing Gains and Harms in Reasoning-Prompt Transfer. https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.19872
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.