Extracting Search Trees from LLM Reasoning Traces Reveals Myopic Planning
arXiv AIArchived May 11, 2026✓ Full text saved
arXiv:2605.06840v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs), especially reasoning models, generate extended chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning that often contains explicit deliberation over future outcomes. Yet whether this deliberation constitutes genuine planning, how it is structured, and what aspects of it drive performance remain poorly understood. In this work, we introduce a new method to characterize LLM planning by extracting and quantifying search trees from reasoning tr
Full text archived locally
✦ AI Summary· Claude Sonnet
Computer Science > Artificial Intelligence
[Submitted on 7 May 2026]
Extracting Search Trees from LLM Reasoning Traces Reveals Myopic Planning
Sixing Chen, Ji-An Li, Saner Cakir, Sinan Akcali, Kayla Lee, Marcelo G. Mattar
Large language models (LLMs), especially reasoning models, generate extended chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning that often contains explicit deliberation over future outcomes. Yet whether this deliberation constitutes genuine planning, how it is structured, and what aspects of it drive performance remain poorly understood. In this work, we introduce a new method to characterize LLM planning by extracting and quantifying search trees from reasoning traces in the four-in-a-row board game. By fitting computational models on the extracted search trees, we characterize how plans are structured and how they influence move decisions. We find that LLMs' search is shallower than humans', and that performance is predicted by search breadth rather than depth. Most strikingly, although LLMs expand deep nodes in their traces, their move choices are best explained by a myopic model that ignores those nodes entirely. A causal intervention study where we selectively prune CoT paragraphs further suggests that move selection is driven predominantly by shallow rather than deep nodes. These patterns contrast with human planning, where performance is driven primarily by deep search. Together, our findings reveal a key difference between LLM and human planning: while human expertise is driven by deeper search, LLMs do not act on deep lookahead. This dissociation offers targeted guidance for aligning LLM and human planning. More broadly, our framework provides a generalizable approach for interpreting the structure of LLM planning across strategic domains.
Subjects: Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
Cite as: arXiv:2605.06840 [cs.AI]
(or arXiv:2605.06840v1 [cs.AI] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2605.06840
Focus to learn more
Submission history
From: Sixing Chen [view email]
[v1] Thu, 7 May 2026 18:45:46 UTC (1,771 KB)
Access Paper:
HTML (experimental)
view license
Current browse context:
cs.AI
< prev | next >
new | recent | 2026-05
Change to browse by:
cs
References & Citations
NASA ADS
Google Scholar
Semantic Scholar
Export BibTeX Citation
Bookmark
Bibliographic Tools
Bibliographic and Citation Tools
Bibliographic Explorer Toggle
Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)
Connected Papers Toggle
Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)
Litmaps Toggle
Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)
scite.ai Toggle
scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)
Code, Data, Media
Demos
Related Papers
About arXivLabs
Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)