e-ISSN: Pending
Negative / Null Result ReportOpen accessComputer Science

Exploring System 1 and 2 communication for latent reasoning in LLMs

Julian Coda-Forno; Zhuokai Zhao; Qiang Zhang; Dipesh Tamboli; Weiwei Li; Xiangjun Fan; Lizhu Zhang; Eric Schulz · 2025 · arXiv

WASTE classifies this as Negative / Null Result Report · AI classification, approximate

The study found no significant effect — useful as a negative control or null benchmark for your own design.

Abstract (excerpt)

Should LLM reasoning live in a separate module, or within a single model's forward pass and representational space? We study dual-architecture latent reasoning, where a fluent Base exchanges latent messages with a Coprocessor, and test two hypotheses aimed at improving latent communication over Liu et al. (2024): (H1) increase channel capacity; (H2) learn communication via joint finetuning. Under matched latent-token budgets on GPT-2 and Qwen-3, H2 is consistently strongest while H1 yields modest gains. A unified soft-embedding baseline, a single model with the same forward pass and shared rep

Excerpt shown for reference under fair use — read the full paper at the publisher.

About to run something similar?

Run an AI Precheck on your own design to catch failure modes like this one before you spend the time. Your first desk check is free.

WASTE indexes this work — it does not host or republish it. Failure-type classification is automated and approximate.

Metadata source: arXiv