Van Yang
2026
Mid-Think: Training-Free Intermediate-Budget Reasoning via Token-Level Triggers
Van Yang | Shouren Wang | Debargha Ganguly | Xinpeng Li | Chaoda Song | Vikash Singh | Vipin Chaudhary | Xiaotian Han
Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2026
Van Yang | Shouren Wang | Debargha Ganguly | Xinpeng Li | Chaoda Song | Vikash Singh | Vipin Chaudhary | Xiaotian Han
Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2026
Reasoning language models are controlled through explicit modes such as Think and No-think, yet we find that these behaviors are largely governed by a few token-level triggers rather than high-level instructions. Through attention analysis and controlled prompting experiments, we show that a leading “Okay” token induces reasoning behavior, while the newline pattern following ‘</think>‘ suppresses it. Based on this observation, we propose Mid-Think, a simple training-free prompting format that combines these triggers to achieve intermediate-budget reasoning, consistently outperforming fixed-token and prompt-based baselines in terms of the accuracy–length trade-off. Furthermore, applying Mid-Think to RL training after SFT reduces training time by approximately 15% while improving final performance of Qwen3-8B on AIME from 69.8% to 72.4% and on GPQA from 58.5% to 61.1%, demonstrating its effectiveness for both inference-time control and RL-based reasoning training.
2025
100-LongBench: Are de facto Long-Context Benchmarks Literally Evaluating Long-Context Ability?
Van Yang | Hongye Jin | Shaochen Zhong | Song Jiang | Qifan Wang | Vipin Chaudhary | Xiaotian Han
Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2025
Van Yang | Hongye Jin | Shaochen Zhong | Song Jiang | Qifan Wang | Vipin Chaudhary | Xiaotian Han
Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2025
Long-context capability is considered one of the most important abilities of LLMs, as a truly long context-capable LLM shall enable its users to effortlessly process many originally exhausting tasks — e.g., digesting a long-form document to find answers v.s., directly asking an LLM about it. However, existing real-task-based long-context evaluation benchmarks have a few major shortcomings. For instance, some Needle-in-a-Haystack-like benchmarks are too synthetic, and therefore do not represent the real world usage of LLMs. While some real-task-based benchmarks like LongBench avoid this problem, such benchmarks are often formed in a way where each data sample has a fixed sequence length, which not only makes them solely suitable for models with a certain range of context windows, but also lacks a proxy to know at what length the model/method-of-interest would fail. Last, most benchmarks tend to not provide proper metrics to separate long-context performance from the model’s baseline ability, so when conducting a cross-model/recipe comparison, such conflation makes the user unable to understand how exactly one model or recipe excels at the long-context task in relation to its baseline ability. To address these issues, we introduce a length-controllable, real-life reflective benchmark with a novel metric that disentangles baseline knowledge from long-context capabilities. Experiments demonstrate the superiority of our datasets in effectively evaluating LLMs. All assets are available at https://github.com/uservan/100-LongBench.git.