arXiv:2511.10788v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) have made reasoning a central benchmark for evaluating intelligence. While prior surveys focus on efficiency by examining how to shorten reasoning chains or reduce computation, this view overlooks a fundamental challenge: current LLMs apply uniform reasoning strategies regardless of task complexity, generating long traces for trivial problems while failing to extend reasoning for difficult tasks. This survey reframes reasoning through the lens of {adaptivity}: the capability to allocate reasoning effort based on input characteristics such as difficulty and uncertainty. We make three contributions. First, we formalize deductive, inductive, and abductive reasoning within the LLM context, connecting these classical cognitive paradigms with their algorithmic realizations. Second, we formalize adaptive reasoning as a control-augmented policy optimization problem balancing task performance with computational cost, distinguishing learned policies from inference-time control mechanisms. Third, we propose a systematic taxonomy organizing existing methods into training-based approaches that internalize adaptivity through reinforcement learning, supervised fine-tuning, and learned controllers, and training-free approaches that achieve adaptivity through prompt conditioning, feedback-driven halting, and modular composition. This framework clarifies how different mechanisms realize adaptive reasoning in practice and enables systematic comparison across diverse strategies. We conclude by identifying open challenges in self-evaluation, meta-reasoning, and human-aligned reasoning control.

arXiv:2603.04024v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Equivocal 3D lesion segmentation exhibits high inter-observer variability. Conventional deterministic models ignore this aleatoric uncertainty, producing over-confident masks that obscure clinical risks. Conversely, while generative methods (e.g., standard diffusion) capture sample diversity, recovering complex topology from pure noise frequently leads to severe structural fractures and out-of-distribution anatomical hallucinations. To resolve this fidelity-diversity trade-off, we propose Volumetric Directional Diffusion (VDD). Unlike standard diffusion models that denoise isotropic Gaussian noise, VDD mathematically anchors the generative trajectory to a deterministic consensus prior. By restricting the generative search space to iteratively predict a 3D boundary residual field, VDD accurately explores the fine-grained geometric variations inherent in expert disagreements without risking topological collapse. Extensive validation on three multi-rater datasets (LIDC-IDRI, KiTS21, and ISBI 2015) demonstrates that VDD achieves state-of-the-art uncertainty quantification (significantly improving GED and CI) while remaining highly competitive in segmentation accuracy against deterministic upper bounds. Ultimately, VDD provides clinicians with anatomically coherent uncertainty maps, enabling safer decision-making and mitigating risks in downstream tasks (e.g., radiotherapy planning or surgical margin assessment).