Hacker News Reader

I thought we already had reasonably clear evidence that the output in the CoT does not actually indicate what the model "thinking" in any real sense, and it's mostly just appending context that may or may not be used, and may or may not be truthful.

Basically: https://www.anthropic.com/research/reasoning-models-dont-say...

View on HN

Are there hidden tokens in the Gemini 2.5 Pro thinking outputs? All I can see in the thinking is high level plans and not actual details of the “thinking.” If you ask it to solve a complex algebra equation, it will not actually do any thinking inside the thinking tag at all. That seems strange and not discussed at all.

If I remember correctly, basically all 'closed' models don't output the raw chain of thought, but only a high-level summary, to avoid other companies using those to train/distill their own models.

As far as I know deepseek is one of the few where you have the full chain of thought. Openai/Anthropic/Google give you only a summary of the chain of thoughts.

That’s a good explanation for the behavior. It is sad that the natural direction of the competition drives the products to be less transparent. That is a win for open-weight models.

To add clarity, it's a win for open-weight models precisely because only their CoT can be analyzed by the user for task-specific alignment.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com