Good Papers

ReSolve: Reusing Candidate Reasoning through Selective Generative Moderation

ReSolve reuses candidate reasoning via selective generative moderation to boost math accuracy and cut token use versus voting and self-consistency.

Bangji Yang, Jiajun Fan, MA Hongba, Xi Zhu, Weizhi Zhang, Minghao Guo, Ye Li, Hamid Palangi, Jiaxuan You

Published Oct 1, 2026arXiv ↗

78%
OverallHighly rated
?
OverallHighly ratedVote to see the scoreThe exact score shows once you've voted, so every vote is your own call. The first half of each home page shelf shows its scores.
Readers
–

Only vote on papers you've read. Sign in with GitHub to vote.

AI panel11/20reviewers recommend it
lenient 4/5
medium 6/10
strict 1/5
AI panel?Vote to see what the 20 AI reviewers said
Panel consensus
ReSolve proves candidate reasoning is reusable inference computation and cuts moderation tokens sharply, though its gains remain token savings rather than reasoning upgrades on a narrow benchmark with no correct-to-incorrect gains over voting.

Abstract

Sampling multiple solutions spends computation on intermediate deductions and unfinished arguments as well as final answers. We introduce ReSolve, a training-free inference procedure that reuses this candidate reasoning through selective generative moderation. An answer-distribution controller invokes a model to examine existing derivations when candidates disagree or lack a parseable answer, then incorporates the generated solution into a bounded loop. Under Hybrid scoring on 130 competition-mathematics problems evaluated with two independently sampled candidate pools, ReSolve obtains 100 and 99 correct answers, compared with 91 and 92 for voting over the same four candidates, with no correct-to-incorrect changes relative to that vote in either pool. Eight-sample self-consistency obtains 94 and 96 correct answers while consuming substantially more tokens; ReSolve uses 46.3% and 47.2% fewer tokens in the two evaluations. A controlled ablation removes visible derivations while retaining answer keys, vote counts, and the per-state output-cap rule, reducing accuracy from 100 to 93 correct despite increasing computation. Selective and always-on Uniform moderation both solve 97 problems, while selectivity reduces moderation tokens by approximately 54% and total pipeline tokens by 6.2%. These results support candidate reasoning as reusable inference computation. They do not establish an accuracy advantage over additional sampling or a distinct benefit from specialized route instructions.