Skip to content
AI News HubLIVE
Original source2 min read

The Readout Shortcut: Positional Number Copying Dominates Arithmetic CoT Readout in Small Language Models

Summary

Research reveals that small language models rely on a positional shortcut—copying the last number before the answer delimiter—rather than logical reasoning when performing arithmetic with chain-of-thought (CoT) prompting. This copying accounts for 89-92% of model accuracy and overrides genuine computation. The findings challenge the faithfulness of CoT-based oversight.

SourcearXiv Machine LearningAuthor: Ming Liu
The Readout Shortcut: Positional Number Copying Dominates Arithmetic CoT Readout in Small Language Models
Report an error

The correction channel is not available yet. You can copy the article reference below for later.

Correction instructions
Read article

[2605.22870] The Readout Shortcut: Positional Number Copying Dominates Arithmetic CoT Readout in Small Language Models

[Submitted on 20 May 2026]

Title:The Readout Shortcut: Positional Number Copying Dominates Arithmetic CoT Readout in Small Language Models

View a PDF of the paper titled The Readout Shortcut: Positional Number Copying Dominates Arithmetic CoT Readout in Small Language Models, by Ming Liu

View PDF HTML (experimental)

Abstract:Chain-of-thought (CoT) prompting is necessary for arithmetic in small language models, yet shuffling its steps preserves most performance. What does CoT contribute if not logical sequencing? In three 1-3B instruction-tuned LMs on GSM8K, we isolate the answer-readout stage via prefix completion and identify a positional shortcut: the model copies whichever number occupies the trailing position before the answer delimiter, regardless of intermediate reasoning. Gold-answer presence accounts for 54-92 pp of accuracy (89-92% of each model's teacher-forcing ceiling); even on incorrect items, the final answer matches the last CoT number 95-96% of the time. The copy channel takes precedence over retained-context completion: replacing the trailing number with a wrong value collapses accuracy to near-zero despite correct intermediates, yet removing it recovers 5-32 pp above that floor--even single-step arithmetic the model can otherwise perform is suppressed when a copyable number is present. Qwen and Llama copy novel distractors 87-95% of the time; Gemma gates selectively. Head-level ablation implicates architecture-specific head sets; the effect replicates on GSM-Symbolic. On non-arithmetic BBH tasks, shuffle retention drops sharply; at 7-8B, content-selective gating emerges. Step-level faithfulness evaluations risk conflating positional answer transport with genuine computation--a failure mode for CoT-based oversight.

Comments: 18 pages (8 main + 10 appendix), 3 figures, 5 tables

Subjects:

Machine Learning (cs.LG); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Computation and Language (cs.CL)

ACM classes: I.2.7; I.2.6

Cite as: arXiv:2605.22870 [cs.LG]

(or arXiv:2605.22870v1 [cs.LG] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2605.22870

arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite

Submission history

From: Ming Liu [view email] [v1] Wed, 20 May 2026 00:32:41 UTC (48 KB)

Full-text links:

Access Paper:

View a PDF of the paper titled The Readout Shortcut: Positional Number Copying Dominates Arithmetic CoT Readout in Small Language Models, by Ming Liu

View PDF

HTML (experimental)

TeX Source

view license

Current browse context:

cs.LG

new | recent | 2026-05

Change to browse by:

cs cs.AI cs.CL

References & Citations

NASA ADS

Google Scholar

Semantic Scholar

Loading...

Data provided by:

Bibliographic Tools

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Bibliographic Explorer Toggle

Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)

Connected Papers Toggle

Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)

Litmaps Toggle

Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)

scite.ai Toggle

scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)

Code, Data, Media

Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article

alphaXiv Toggle

alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?)

Links to Code Toggle

CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)

DagsHub Toggle

DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)

GotitPub Toggle

Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)

Huggingface Toggle

Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?)

ScienceCast Toggle

ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)

Demos

Demos

Replicate Toggle

Replicate (What is Replicate?)

Spaces Toggle

Hugging Face Spaces (What is Spaces?)

Spaces Toggle

TXYZ.AI (What is TXYZ.AI?)

Related Papers

Recommenders and Search Tools

Link to Influence Flower

Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)

Core recommender toggle

CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)

IArxiv recommender toggle

IArxiv Recommender (What is IArxiv?)

Author

Venue

Institution

Topic

About arXivLabs

arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)

Key points and analysis

Article intelligence

InvestorsAdvanced

Key points

  • Small LMs use a positional number-copying shortcut for arithmetic CoT readout, not stepwise logic.
  • The copy mechanism contributes 89-92% of accuracy and takes precedence over reasoning.
  • Architecture-specific variations exist (Qwen, Llama, Gemma), but the trend is consistent across models.
  • The discovery poses risks for CoT faithfulness evaluation and oversight methods.

Highlights and analysis are generated automatically and may contain errors. Check the original source.