LGMay 13

LLMs Know When They Know, but Do Not Act on It: A Metacognitive Harness for Test-time Scaling

arXiv:2605.1418684.2
Predicted impact top 12% in LG · last 90 daysOriginality Highly original
AI Analysis

For practitioners using LLMs, this shows that existing models can be substantially improved without retraining by leveraging their own self-monitoring signals for reasoning control.

LLMs have latent metacognitive signals (feeling-of-knowing and judgment-of-learning) that are not used during inference. A metacognitive harness that uses these signals to control test-time scaling improves accuracy from 48.3 to 56.9 on a fixed Claude Sonnet-4.6 model, surpassing leaderboard entries on three benchmarks.

Large language models (LLMs) often expose useful signals of self-monitoring: before solving a problem, they can estimate whether they are likely to succeed, and after solving it, they can judge whether their answer is likely to be correct. However, these signals are typically measured or elicited in isolation, rather than used to control inference. In this work, we ask whether LLMs possess latent metacognitive ability that can be turned into effective test-time control. Inspired by the Nelson--Narens theory from cognitive psychology, we propose a metacognitive harness that separates monitoring from reasoning. For each problem, the model first reports a pre-solve feeling-of-knowing (FOK) signal; after each solve attempt, it reports a post-solve judgment-of-learning (JOL) signal. Rather than treating these signals as passive confidence estimates, the harness turns them into an explicit control interface for reasoning: it decides when to trust the current solution, when to retry with compact metacognitive feedback, and when to pass multiple attempts to a final aggregator. Across text, code, and multimodal reasoning benchmarks, our harness substantially improves a fixed Claude Sonnet-4.6 base model without parameter updates or benchmark-specific fine-tuning. On the evaluated public benchmark snapshots, it raises pooled accuracy from 48.3 to 56.9 and exceeds the strongest listed leaderboard entries on the three primary evaluation settings: HLE-Verified, LiveCodeBench v6, and R-Bench-V. These results suggest that strong LLMs may already possess useful metacognitive ability, but require an explicit control harness to act on it during reasoning.

Foundations

The foundational work for this paper's niche, ranked by how specifically the neighbourhood builds on it — not by global fame.

Your Notes