Hi, This seems like a really great research, I hope you received the endorsement for your paper!
I’m an independent researcher, no institutional affiliation, and I’ve just finished my first paper as well. I’m stuck at arXiv’s endorsement wall for cs.LG too and would really appreciate some help getting past it.
Short version of what it’s about: I trained a chess-playing LLM through a latent-reasoning curriculum (Coconut-style continuous “thoughts” instead of written-out reasoning), then applied GRPO on top of it. To figure out where the resulting gain actually came from, I ran a six-condition causal battery on the same model before and after RL: swapping the thought vectors for a fixed placeholder, adding noise, removing them, zeroing them out. Legal-move rate climbs from 48% to 61% and checkmate confabulation drops to zero, but the causal tests show neither checkpoint actually depends on the content of its latent thoughts. What changes with RL is robustness to disruption, not reliance on the thoughts themselves, which pushes back a bit on the usual assumption that latent thoughts function as an active scratchpad the model consults during inference.
Endorsement code: WSI8UA
Link: [Log in to arXiv | arXiv e-print repository](https://arxiv.org/auth/endorse?x=WSI8UA)
If you’re registered as an endorser for cs.LG and willing to take a look, I’d be really grateful. And if you’re not able to, no worries at all, thanks for reading this far either way!