Reasoning4Sciences: Bridging Reasoning Language Models to All Scientific Branches

While Reasoning Language Models (RLMs) are rapidly emerging as powerful tools for scientific research, their impact is primarily concentrated in "hard science" fields. The slow -- or lack of -- adoption of RLMs in other branches of science is causing a widening gap in research productivity. In this survey, we provide the first comprehensive analysis of RLM adoption across 28 scientific disciplines following the classification used by the European Research Council (ERC), spanning the Social Sciences and Humanities, Physical Sciences and Engineering, and Life Sciences. We examine how RLMs are developed, evaluated, and applied across disciplines. Furthermore, we introduce a maturity-oriented assessment framework based on available domain-specific development and evaluation resources, revealing substantial disparities in RLM maturity that become even more pronounced when only publicly available resources are considered. Finally, we highlight current implementation paradigms that are gaining popularity across disciplines, current challenges, and future directions in enabling RLM adoption across science.

What properties of reasoning supervision are associated with improved downstream model quality?

Validating training data for reasoning models typically requires expensive trial-and-error fine-tuning cycles. In this work, we investigate whether the utility of a reasoning dataset can be reliably predicted prior to training using intrinsic data metrics. We propose a suite of quantitative measures and evaluate their predictive power by fine-tuning 8B and 11B models on semantically distinct variants of a Polish reasoning dataset. Our analysis reveals that these intrinsic metrics demonstrate strong and significant correlations with downstream model performance. Crucially, we find that the predictors of utility are scale-dependent: smaller models rely on alignment-focused metrics to ensure precision, whereas larger models benefit from high redundancy, utilizing verbose traces to solve complex tasks. These findings establish a scale-aware framework for validating reasoning data, enabling practitioners to select effective training sets without the need for exhaustive empirical testing.

Divide, Cache, Conquer: Dichotomic Prompting for Efficient Multi-Label LLM-Based Classification

We introduce a method for efficient multi-label text classification with large language models (LLMs), built on reformulating classification tasks as sequences of dichotomic (yes/no) decisions. Instead of generating all labels in a single structured response, each target dimension is queried independently, which, combined with a prefix caching mechanism, yields substantial efficiency gains for short-text inference without loss of accuracy. To demonstrate the approach, we focus on affective text analysis, covering 24 dimensions including emotions and sentiment. Using LLM-to-SLM distillation, a powerful annotator model (DeepSeek-V3) provides multiple annotations per text, which are aggregated to fine-tune smaller models (HerBERT-Large, CLARIN-1B, PLLuM-8B, Gemma3-1B). The fine-tuned models show significant improvements over zero-shot baselines, particularly on the dimensions seen during training. Our findings suggest that decomposing multi-label classification into dichotomic queries, combined with distillation and cache-aware inference, offers a scalable and effective framework for LLM-based classification. While we validate the method on affective states, the approach is general and applicable across domains.