Claim LD01-SL-C37 (v1.0)
Testing OpenAI’s o1, a model trained to reason step by step, the authors of “Embers of Autoregression” found that it substantially outperformed earlier models “in many cases” but “still displays the same qualitative trends”: its accuracy at decoding a shift cipher ranged from 47% in the lowest-probability case to 92% in the highest, and it used more reasoning tokens on low-probability examples.
Research opportunities this claim motivates
What this claim leaves open for research. Each is a hypothesis about a gap, not a finding.
- Do the failure patterns of 2023–2024 language models persist in reasoning models?OpenAI's o1 shows the same pattern at higher accuracy (47% to 92%).
Provenance and status
- Claim type
- Estimate
- Publication status
- Eligible for publication, with qualifiers: preprint
- Verification state
- Checked against the primary source; the source is a preprint. Who checked this claim is not recorded for it; claim checks so far were AI-led, and no person has checked claims against their sources.
- Does not license
- A claim about later reasoning models, or that o1 cannot do these tasks
- Limitations
- Read in arXiv version 2 (4 October 2024); o1’s workings are not public; ceiling effects limit some comparisons, as the authors note; one author works for the developer of the model tested; Anthropic’s Claude 3, made by the developer of the model that drafted this debate, is among the models compared
- Source (as cited)
- McCoy, Yao, Friedman, Hardy & Griffiths, “When a language model is optimized for reasoning, does it still show embers of autoregression? An analysis of OpenAI o1,” arXiv:2410.01792, 2024
- Source type
- Preprint (recorded as “Preprint”)
- Institutional position
- Mixed: independent academic (Yale University, Princeton University), Roundtable, and AI developer (one author at OpenAI, whose model is tested; he joined after the original project was completed)
- Maturity of the evidence
- Emerging evidence
- Recorded date
- 16 October 2026
- Currentness / correction
- This is the current version. No correction or concern is recorded on its sources.
Sources this version cites
Version
This is the current version, v1.0. Earlier versions stay available, and their records never change.
Raw record: every recorded field, with its coded values
All 25 canonical Claim fields, verbatim, with the coded values derived from them. The plain-language labels above are read from these.
- Claim type (coded)
- ESTIMATE (as printed: “ESTIMATE”)
- Publication status (coded)
- ELIGIBLE (PREPRINT) (as printed: “ELIGIBLE WITH PREPRINT QUALIFIER”)
- Verification state (coded)
- CONTENT_VERIFIED_PRIMARY (PREPRINT)
- Source type (coded)
- PREPRINT
- Maturity (coded)
- EMERGING
| # | Canonical field | Canonical value (verbatim) | Normalized (Claim Value Vocabulary v1.0.2) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | CLAIM ID | LD01-SL-C37 | — |
| 2 | PUBLIC-FACING CLAIM | Testing OpenAI’s o1, a model trained to reason step by step, the authors of “Embers of Autoregression” found that it substantially outperformed earlier models “in many cases” but “still displays the same qualitative trends”: its accuracy at decoding a shift cipher ranged from 47% in the lowest-probability case to 92% in the highest, and it used more reasoning tokens on low-probability examples. | — |
| 3 | CLAIM TYPE | ESTIMATE | base_types: ESTIMATE |
| 4 | RESEARCH STRAND | B — Evidence that could tell the accounts apart | — |
| 5 | MATURITY | EMERGING | states: EMERGING |
| 6 | SOURCE | McCoy, Yao, Friedman, Hardy & Griffiths, “When a language model is optimized for reasoning, does it still show embers of autoregression? An analysis of OpenAI o1,” arXiv:2410.01792, 2024 | source_ids: SRC-SL-MCCOY-ET-AL-O1-ARXIV-2410-01792 |
| 7 | SOURCE TYPE | Preprint | classes: PREPRINT |
| 8 | INSTITUTIONAL POSITION | Mixed: independent academic (Yale University, Princeton University), Roundtable, and AI developer (one author at OpenAI, whose model is tested; he joined after the original project was completed) | — |
| 9 | SCOPE | Deterministic text tasks in English; OpenAI o1 compared with earlier models, 2024 | — |
| 10 | DESIGN | Re-test of earlier tasks varying output probability and task frequency, with accuracy and the number of reasoning tokens as measures | — |
| 11 | SAMPLE / DATASET | Tasks from the authors’ 2023 study, including shift ciphers, Pig Latin, article swapping and list reversal | — |
| 12 | MODEL / TOOL / VERSION | OpenAI o1 (preview, 2024) and earlier models | — |
| 13 | COMPARATOR | High- and low-probability versions of the same task; earlier models | — |
| 14 | MAIN RESULT | Shift-cipher accuracy 47% (lowest probability) to 92% (highest); large gains on rare task variants, but sensitivity to probability persists; more tokens used where probability is low | — |
| 15 | INFERENTIAL TARGET | Whether a model optimized for reasoning still shows traces of next-word prediction | — |
| 16 | DOES NOT LICENSE | A claim about later reasoning models, or that o1 cannot do these tasks | — |
| 17 | VERIFICATION STATE | CONTENT VERIFIED PREPRINT | state: CONTENT_VERIFIED_PRIMARY · qualifiers: PREPRINT · verified_by: UNKNOWN |
| 18 | LIMITATIONS | Read in arXiv version 2 (4 October 2024); o1’s workings are not public; ceiling effects limit some comparisons, as the authors note; one author works for the developer of the model tested; Anthropic’s Claude 3, made by the developer of the model that drafted this debate, is among the models compared | — |
| 19 | CONTRADICTORY / SUPPORTING SOURCES | The original study: LD01-SL-C18 | — |
| 20 | GEOGRAPHY / LANGUAGE | English task set | — |
| 21 | DISTRIBUTIONAL LEDGER | Not analysed in this claim | — |
| 22 | R01 / FIELD-MAP LINKS | LD-01, T4, D3 | — |
| 23 | WHAT WOULD CHANGE THIS CLAIM? | Reasoning models whose accuracy no longer depends on output probability | — |
| 24 | PUBLICATION STATUS | ELIGIBLE WITH PREPRINT QUALIFIER | state: ELIGIBLE · qualifiers: PREPRINT |
| 25 | RECORDED DATE | 2026-10-16 | — |
Field 22 references resolved against Field Map v0.2: LD-01 (LIVING_DEBATE); T4 (TENSION); D3 (DOMAIN)
The sources as recorded, with their record IDs and coded source types:
Pinned Sources (field 6, version-specific)
- “McCoy, Yao, Friedman, Hardy & Griffiths, “When a language model is optimized for reasoning, does it still show embers of autoregression? An analysis of OpenAI o1,” arXiv:2410.01792, 2024” → McCoy et al. (2024), “When a language model is optimized…” (SRC-SL-MCCOY-ET-AL-O1-ARXIV-2410-01792--v1.0) — McCoy, Yao, Friedman, Hardy & Griffiths, “When a language model is optimized for reasoning, does it still show embers of autoregression? An analysis of OpenAI o1,” arXiv:2410.01792, 2024; class PREPRINT (explicit public provenance pin)
Cited by Living Debate versions
Cite this page
SocioLens project. (2026, October 16). Testing OpenAI’s o1, a model trained to reason step by step, the authors of “Embers of Autoregression” found that it substantially outperformed earlier models “in many cases” but “still displays the same qualitative trends”: its accuracy at decoding a shift cipher ranged from 47% in the lowest-probability case to 92% in the highest, and it used more reasoning tokens on low-probability examples [Claim LD01-SL-C37, version v1.0]. SocioLens. https://sociolens-web.pages.dev/claims/ld01-sl-c37/v1.0/
@misc{sociolens_ld01_sl_c37_v1_0,
author = {{SocioLens project}},
title = {Testing OpenAI’s o1, a model trained to reason step by step, the authors of “Embers of Autoregression” found that it substantially outperformed earlier models “in many cases” but “still displays the same qualitative trends”: its accuracy at decoding a shift cipher ranged from 47\% in the lowest-probability case to 92\% in the highest, and it used more reasoning tokens on low-probability examples.},
year = {2026},
date = {2026-10-16},
howpublished = {\url{https://sociolens-web.pages.dev/claims/ld01-sl-c37/v1.0/}},
note = {Claim LD01-SL-C37, version v1.0}
}The link points to this version, whose record never changes. For a finding, cite the original study as well: SocioLens summarizes research and does not replace it.
Research-of-record provenance
Materialized by sociolens-materializer 0.6.0 at 2026-09-28T20:00:00.000Z; normalization contract SocioLens — Claim Value Vocabulary v1.0.2 — Pre-Spike Materialization Contract (v1.0.2). Content seal SHA-256 dc86dfb7d23915cdf6452778d3e6a3963abb0f1a8a13ad075f5a46900749499d.
Repository-authored inputs (not Drive exports)
- SocioLens claim — LD01-SL-C37 v1.0 (v1.0) — written in the SocioLens repository by Project Lead (Claude, AI) on 2026-10-16; no Drive identity exists. Authority: AGENTS.md "Authority" (the Project Lead decides research content within the research-integrity rules) and the Owner's choice in the SocioLens project chat on 16 October 2026 to build the LD-01 debate; a new Claim, first version, written from the project's LD-01 source notes, checked against full texts, official web pages or official abstracts. Block “ENTRY 37 — LD01-SL-C37” SHA-256
64bf3527da5d3b35ce70be5c531fb4288ff9d41d4835f787706ff0a0099d59fe; fixturefixtures/authored/claims/LD01-SL-C37--v1.0.
Builder decisions (not Drive data)
- VERSION = v1.0 — basis: Claim version taken from the repository-authored claim fixture version (SocioLens claim — LD01-SL-C37 v1.0); the first version of a new Claim of the LD-01 debate
- CURRENT_POINTER = true — basis: repository-authored claim "SocioLens claim — LD01-SL-C37 v1.0" (Project Lead (Claude, AI), 2026-10-16); basis: AGENTS.md "Authority" (the Project Lead decides research content within the research-integrity rules) and the Owner's choice in the SocioLens project chat on 16 October 2026 to build the LD-01 debate; a new Claim, first version, written from the project's LD-01 source notes, checked against full texts, official web pages or official abstracts
- FIELD_6_SOURCE_REFERENCE = SRC-SL-MCCOY-ET-AL-O1-ARXIV-2410-01792--v1.0 — basis: field 6 of ENTRY 37 — LD01-SL-C37 cites "McCoy, Yao, Friedman, Hardy & Griffiths, “When a language model is optimized for reasoning, does it still show embers of autoregression? An analysis of OpenAI o1,” arXiv:2410.01792, 2024"; the only field-6 segment of this ClaimVersion's repository-authored ledger block.
- SOURCE_PROVENANCE_PIN = SRC-SL-MCCOY-ET-AL-O1-ARXIV-2410-01792--v1.0 — basis: explicit version-pinned public provenance of this ClaimVersion (Amendment v1.2 §6): the pinned field-6 Source record "McCoy, Yao, Friedman, Hardy & Griffiths, “When a language model is optimized for reasoning, does it still show embers of autoregression? An analysis of OpenAI o1,” arXiv:2410.01792, 2024".