Sign inGet started
Paper · arXiv

Does Thinking Help Fairness? Reasoning Tokens Resolve Some Biases but Create More

Thinking in reasoning language models (RLMs) has been subject to debate on whether it resolves or amplifies bias. Prior works have shown competing conclusions in both directions. Using a within-model thinking-vs.-non-thinking ablation across QwQ-32B, DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-32B, and Qwen3-32B on three high-stakes decision tasks (Adult, COMPAS, Credit), we show that thinking has an asymmetric dual effect on counterfactual fairness: it both resolves counterfactual flips produced by the non-thinking baseline and creates new flips at near-saturating model confidence. In all nine (model, dataset) combinations, the created flips outnumber the resolved flips by roughly 5 times. To explain the e...

AuthorsDeng Pan, Joe Germino, Yihong Ma et al.
Primary categorycs.AI
Published25 September 2026
Last updated at source25 September 2026
cs.AI
Embed this entry
<iframe src="https://silytics.si/embed/item/c0a4dd27-3da2-4f70-ad82-7948eccfbfc9" width="420" height="190" style="border:0" loading="lazy" title="Silytics entry"></iframe>

Free, no tracking. More about feeds and embeds.

Silytics shows public metadata from arXiv and links to the original. Information may be incomplete or out of date. Last refreshed 17 October 2026. Licenses and terms of the original apply to the work itself. Not financial, legal or professional advice.