Skip to content

ThinkJev: One Thought, Every Budget for Calibrated Typed Decisions

Oct 2026 · 0 citations · 33 references
Computer Science

TL;DR

ThinkJev builds a fast and a slow system from one open hybrid-thinking model that can answer directly or after a thought, and chooses when to think from System 1's confidence alone saves less, because the decisions System 1 is least sure of are often not the ones thinking fixes.

Abstract

Many uses of language models end in a typed decision: a choice among a closed set of options, whose probabilities code can act on. Reading those probabilities from one forward pass is fast but often wrong on decisions that take several steps, such as arithmetic, counting, and date comparison. Letting the model think first fixes most of these errors, but costs seconds per decision instead of milliseconds. To pay for thinking only where it helps, ThinkJev builds a fast and a slow system from one open hybrid-thinking model that can answer directly or after a thought. System 1 reads the model's probabilities for the option letters when it answers directly; System 2 reads the same letters after the model has thought on the same cached prompt, so escalating repeats no work and both systems give probabilities over the same options. Because the letters can be read after any number of thought tokens, one sampled thought also gives the answer under every thinking budget. Without training, ThinkJev lets System 1 answer alone only where a statistical test on labeled dev data guarantees that its accepted answers stay under a target error rate. At a 5% target, Qwen3.5-27B answers 24.5% of 8359 test decisions this way with a realized error of 3.9% (Qwen3.5-4B and 9B: 6.5% and 0.0%). For the rest, stopping each thought as soon as its answer is confident reaches 81.6% accuracy, against 82.7% for always thinking, with 72% of the thought tokens. Choosing when to think from System 1's confidence alone saves less, because the decisions System 1 is least sure of are often not the ones thinking fixes. On the public items of JevBench, an independent benchmark of typed-decision services, Qwen3.5-27B thinks on 29.4% and is not distinguishable in accuracy from the two thinking APIs listed (exploratory). Code and data generators are available at https://github.com/ding-xiaolu/ThinkJev.

View source

Similar papers

#artificial intelligence Preprint Oct 2026

SanSi: A Looped Typed Decision Model for System 1.5 Thinking

Typed decision models answer a declared question without generating text: a decision head returns a probability for each of the declared options in a single forward pass. A single pass is fast, intuitive System 1 thinking. We study what lies between one pass and generated reasoning: looping, in which the same layers ar...

Shu-Yu Gan, Young-Jun Lee, Dongyeop Kang · 2 citations
#artificial intelligence Preprint Oct 2026

LEV: Thinking Fast and Deep with Looped Decision Models

Decision models answer typed questions about an input with one probability per option, computed in a single forward pass without generating text. Like the fast System 1 of dual-process theory, they answer at once, but their depth is fixed at training time, so they spend the same computation on easy and hard questions....

Dingjie Song, Zhiling Yan, Yuxuan Zhang et al. · 0 citations
#machine learning Preprint Sep 2026

AnyJev Technical Report

AnyJev is described, which reads a typed decision from one prefill of a pretrained instruction-tuned language model, which divides out a label prior estimated from unlabelled inputs, and it averages log-probabilities over the K cyclic rotations of the option list.

Jia-Mu Zhang, Tian-Ze Yang, Yu-Cheng Shi et al. · 3 citations
Preprint Oct 2026

What Can't Jev Decide? Probing the Limits of One-Pass Decision Models

Jev and its open replicas choose among the options a caller supplies with a single forward pass, fast enough to decide inside an agent loop. We ask what such a model cannot decide, and find a simple limit: Jev cannot make a decision that an LLM makes only by writing out intermediate steps. On a benchmark that varies on...

Wang Yang, Xin-Peng Li, Yan-Yan Zhang et al. · 0 citations
#artificial intelligence Preprint Oct 2026

System Switch: When Should a Fast Decision Model Stop and Think?

Dual-process agents pair a fast policy with a slow deliberative model. In real-time settings the slow model usually runs continuously; in turn-based agents and robot planners it is invoked on events such as uncertainty or a detected failure. We study a fast learned actor that takes every decision and hands control to a...

G. Bailo · 2 citations · ⚡1
#machine learning Preprint Sep 2026

Counting on Thinking: Tracing Evidence Integration in Language Models

This work asks why evidence integration in large language models requires thinking, and reasoning trajectories showed models revisiting input, recounting letters, and checking intermediate counts that informed the answer, suggesting that thinking constructs the accumulated count that direct responses lack rather than r...

Jing-Ming Xue, Robert C. Wilson, Hua-Dong Xiong · 0 citations

Related blog posts

MIT News · Artificial Intelligence Sep 29, 2026

Who we become when we talk to machines

Professor Sherry Turkle’s new book, “Artificial Intimacy,” offers a withering critique of chatbots and the antisocial dynamics she believes they encourage.

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.