Teaching Thinking Models to Reason with Tools: A Full-Pipeline Recipe for Tool-Integrated Reasoning

Tool-integrated reasoning (TIR) offers a direct way to extend thinking models beyond the limits of text-only reasoning. Paradoxically, we observe that tool-enabled evaluation can degrade reasoning performance even when the strong thinking models make almost no actual tool calls. In this paper, we investigate how to inject natural tool-use behavior into a strong thinking model without sacrificing its no-tool reasoning ability, and present a comprehensive TIR recipe. We highlight that (i) the effectiveness of TIR supervised fine-tuning (SFT) hinges on the learnability of teacher trajectories, which should prioritize problems inherently suited for tool-augmented solutions; (ii) controlling the proportion of tool-use trajectories could mitigate the catastrophic forgetting of text-only reasoning capacity; (iii) optimizing for pass@k and response length instead of training loss could maximize TIR SFT gains while preserving headroom for reinforcement learning (RL) exploration; (iv) a stable RL with verifiable rewards (RLVR) stage, built upon suitable SFT initialization and explicit safeguards against mode collapse, provides a simple yet remarkably effective solution. When applied to Qwen3 thinking models at 4B and 30B scales, our recipe yields models that achieve state-of-the-art performance in a wide range of benchmarks among open-source models, such as 96.7% and 99.2% on AIME 2025 for 4B and 30B, respectively.

Characterizing, Evaluating, and Optimizing Complex Reasoning

Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) increasingly rely on reasoning traces with complex internal structures. However, existing work lacks a unified answer to three fundamental questions: (1) what defines high-quality reasoning, (2) how to reliably evaluate long, implicitly structured reasoning traces, and (3) how to use such evaluation signals for reasoning optimization. To address these challenges, we provide a unified perspective. (1) We introduce the ME$^2$ principle to characterize reasoning quality along macro- and micro-level concerning efficiency and effectiveness. (2) Built on this principle, we model reasoning traces as directed acyclic graphs (DAGs) and develop a DAG-based pairwise evaluation method, capturing complex reasoning structures. (3) Based on this method, we construct the TRM-Preference dataset and train a Thinking Reward Model (TRM) to evaluate reasoning quality at scale. Experiments show that thinking rewards serve as an effective optimization signal. At test time, selecting better reasoning leads to better outcomes (up to 19.3% gain), and during RL training, thinking rewards enhance reasoning and performance (up to 3.9% gain) across diverse tasks.

New Skills or Sharper Primitives? A Probabilistic Perspective on the Emergence of Reasoning in RLVR

Whether Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) endows Large Language Models (LLMs) with new capabilities or merely elicits latent traces remains a central debate. In this work, we align with the former view, proposing a probabilistic framework where capability is defined by instance-level solvability. We hypothesize that the emergence of complex reasoning can be driven by sharpening atomic step probabilities, which enables models to overcome the exponential decay of success rates inherent in multi-step reasoning chains. Utilizing the Algebrarium framework, we train models exclusively on single-step operations and evaluate their performance on unseen multi-step tasks. Our empirical results confirm that: (1) RLVR incentivizes the exploration of previously inaccessible solution paths by amplifying the model's existing skills; (2) composite performance is strictly governed by the joint probability of atomic steps, evidenced by high Pearson correlation coefficients ($ρ\in [0.69, 0.96]$); and (3) RLVR, acting as a global optimizer, can cause specific skills to be sacrificed to maximize aggregate reward. Our work offers a novel explanation for emergent abilities in RLVR, suggesting that the iterative optimization of solvable problems enables models to develop the capabilities to tackle previously unsolvable scenarios.