Causal Consistency Regularization: Training Verifiably Sensitive Reasoning in Large Language Models

Abstract

Large language models can produce correct answers while relying on flawed reasoning traces, partly because common training objectives reward final-answer correctness rather than faithful intermediate reasoning. This undermines trustworthiness in high-stakes settings. We propose Counterfactual Sensitivity Regularization (CSR), a training paradigm that improves reasoning faithfulness by enforcing causal consistency between reasoning steps and outcomes. CSR automatically applies operator-level interventions to reasoning traces, such as swapping "+" with "-", to generate minimally perturbed counterfactual rationales, and penalizes the model when these logically invalid traces still lead to the original answer. Our implementation is efficient, adding about 9 percent training overhead via a warm-start curriculum and token-subset optimization. We evaluate faithfulness using Counterfactual Outcome Sensitivity (COS), which measures how appropriately answers change under logical perturbations. Across arithmetic (GSM8K), logical deduction (ProofWriter), multi-hop question answering (HotpotQA), and code generation (MBPP), CSR yields improved accuracy versus faithfulness trade-offs, establishing a new Pareto frontier. CSR improves faithfulness over standard fine-tuning and process supervision by up to 70 percentage points, and transfers across model families with 94.2 to 96.7 percent success in structured domains. CSR also complements inference-time methods such as self-consistency. Overall, CSR offers a practical route to more reliable reasoning in structured domains, including mathematics, formal logic, and code, where operators are well-defined and verifiable, covering an estimated 40 to 60 percent of high-stakes reasoning deployments.