Large reasoning models (LRMs) generate long chain-of-thought traces before answering, creating significant inference overhead. Pruning can reduce this cost, but its effectiveness depends on the calibration data used to estimate parameter importance. Recent work calibrates on the model's own rollouts instead of generic dataset, but treats all reasoning tokens uniformly, regardless of whether they contribute to successful reasoning. As a result, pruning protects weights by statistical salience rather than by their contribution to correct reasoning, so weights behind erroneous computation survive as readily as those behind correct computation. These erroneous patterns then get carried into the pruned model, degrading reasoning quality, producing both lower accuracy and longer reasoning traces. We propose Outcome-Based Calibration for Large Reasoning Model Pruning (OBC-Prune) to close this gap. OBC first constructs difficulty-matched pairs of correct and incorrect rollouts from problems the model answers inconsistently. It then estimates the causal importance of each reasoning sentence through intervention-based analysis, quantifying how removing its influence affects subsequent predictions. These causal importance scores are converted into per-token weights that rescale the calibration activations used by one-shot pruning methods (SparseGPT, Wanda, ALPS), without modifying the underlying pruning algorithms. Experiments on DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen 1.5B, 7B, and 14B models at 40\% and 50\% sparsity demonstrate consistent improvements over state-of-the-art calibration baselines across most model sizes and sparsity levels on MATH500, LiveCodeBench, and AIME 2025. These results indicate that preserving causally important reasoning circuits is a substantially more effective pruning objective than uniformly preserving observed activations.

翻译：暂无翻译