Reasoning Consensus: Structural Ensembling of LLM Reasoning via Weighted DAG Aggregation

arXiv:2607.27783v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) explore problems through chain-of-thought, but this exploration is buried in unstructured prose. On high-stakes tasks, users cannot tell which steps are well-supported, which alternatives were seriously considered, or how the final conclusion compares to those the model discarded. We propose a framework that ensembles the reasoning structure, not just the answers, of multiple LLMs by weighted merging of Directed Acyclic Graphs (DAGs) extracted from reasoning chains. We weight each step by how many traces independently attest to it, to return "Consensus Reasoning". Across six benchmarks spanning statutory interpretation, graduate-level science, narrative multi-hop reasoning, and first-order logic, our ensemble outperforms a matched-budget majority-vote baseline, with a maximum accuracy gain of 3.1% on MuSR-MM (narrative multi-hop reasoning). On a single model, the framework matches or exceeds self-consistency at the same trace budget while additionally exposing an inspectable consensus reasoning graph. Ensemble weights correlate with LLM-judge rankings of reasoning quality at Spearman rho = 0.30-0.51, and consensus subgraphs are preferred over alternatives leading to the majority-vote answer in 54.4-65.4% of head-to-head comparisons across five of six datasets. We observe that our framework can also be used to analyze diverse reasoning perspectives for a problem.

Related

• Adaptive Multi-Expert Reasoning via Difficulty-Aware Routing and Uncertainty-Guided Aggregation
• FERA: Uncertainty-Aware Federated Reasoning for Large Language Models
• LaTER: Efficient Test-Time Reasoning via Latent Exploration and Explicit Verification

Source: arXiv cs.CL | 2026-07-31