GPT-5.5 Codex 推理标记聚类可能导致性能下降。
GPT-5.5 Codex reasoning-token clustering may be leading to degraded performance

原始链接: https://github.com/openai/codex/issues/30364

对 2026 年 2 月至 6 月期间 Codex 遥测数据的分析显示,GPT-5.5 的响应元数据存在显著异常:推理标记(reasoning-token)数量不成比例地集中在 516、1034 和 1552 个标记上。 尽管 GPT-5.5 的响应仅占总响应量的 19.3%,但它贡献了 82% 的“刚好 516 个标记”事件。这种模式在其他模型变体中并不存在,且与整体推理标记强度呈负相关——尽管此类聚集事件有所增加,但整体推理强度却在下降。这种行为表明,这更像是模型特有的阈值设置、截断或预算约束,而非任务复杂度的自然变异。 这种聚集现象与报告中提到的 Codex 复杂任务性能下降情况相吻合。数据显示,GPT-5.5 响应达到 516 个标记这一阈值的概率,是非 GPT-5.5 模型基准的 33 倍。 现请求 Codex 团队调查这些固定的标记峰值是源于有意设置的内部阈值、路由异常,还是系统级的截断。建议的验证方案包括:对比“刚好 516 个标记”任务与可变推理长度任务的性能表现,并审计 GPT-5.5 的调度逻辑。

Hacker News 的用户报告称,OpenAI GPT-5.5 Codex 模型出现了严重的性能退化,其特征表现为一个“自适应思维”错误。 研究人员和用户发现,该模型在执行推理任务时经常会“短路”,在消耗恰好 516 个 token 后便返回错误结果。相反,当模型成功完成任务时,通常会使用 6,000 到 8,000 个推理 token。测试证实,在使用 Codex CLI 进行的重复试验中,有近一半出现了这种行为,导致依赖该模型进行编程任务的资深用户感到非常沮丧。 尽管有些人将此问题归因于“享乐适应”或用户的主观偏见,但许多开发人员分享了可复现的测试案例,证实了在 516 个 token 处会出现峰值,这表明 OpenAI 的推理引擎在集群或批处理推理预算方面可能存在缺陷。 此次讨论引发了关于专有“黑盒”模型与本地开源替代方案之间可靠性的广泛辩论。许多用户现在正通过外部仪表板积极跟踪模型性能,或考虑转向 Claude 等竞争对手,理由是 OpenAI 最近的模型更新缺乏一致性和透明度。
相关文章

原文

Summary

I found an aggregate pattern in Codex token_count metadata: gpt-5.5 responses disproportionately land at exactly reasoning_output_tokens = 516, with additional fixed-boundary spikes around 1034 and 1552.

This appears model-specific and coincides with lower overall reasoning-token intensity, which may help explain degraded performance on complex/high-stakes Codex tasks.

This is related to #29353, which reported a task-level reproduction where gpt-5.5 runs ending at exactly 516 reasoning tokens returned the wrong answer. This issue adds aggregate evidence across a larger Feb-Jun window.

I am not claiming this proves hidden chain-of-thought truncation. The narrower claim is that Codex telemetry shows a GPT-5.5-specific fixed-token clustering anomaly that looks consistent with thresholded reasoning-budget behavior.

Environment

Evidence

Metric Value
Response-level token records analyzed 390,195
Sessions represented 865
Exact reasoning_output_tokens = 516 events 3,363
GPT-5.5 share of all responses 19.3%
GPT-5.5 share of exact-516 events 82.0%
GPT-5.5 exact-516 / >=516 ratio 44.0%
Non-GPT-5.5 exact-516 / >=516 ratio 1.3%

Model-level result:

Model Response records Exact 516 / >=516
gpt-5.5 75,401 44.0%
gpt-5.4 25,214 19.8%
gpt-5.2 247,575 0.34%
gpt-5.3-codex 13,333 0.0%
gpt-5.3-codex-spark 26,179 0.0%

Monthly exact-516 clustering increased sharply:

Month Exact 516 / >=516
Feb 2026 0.11%
Mar 2026 2.45%
Apr 2026 4.25%
May 2026 53.30%
Jun 2026 35.84%

At the same time, overall reasoning-token intensity decreased:

Month Mean reasoning tokens P90 reasoning tokens
Feb 2026 268.1 772
Mar 2026 256.8 723
Apr 2026 228.7 669
May 2026 106.9 344
Jun 2026 168.5 515

Why this looks suspicious

The anomaly is not simply higher reasoning-token usage overall. Mean and P90 reasoning-token intensity fell from February-April to May-June, while exact-516 clustering rose sharply.

The clustering is also not evenly distributed across models. gpt-5.5 accounts for only 19.3% of responses but 82.0% of exact-516 events. Its exact-516 / >=516 ratio is about 33.6x higher than the non-GPT-5.5 baseline.

The fixed values are also notable: 516, 1034, and 1552 look like repeated threshold boundaries rather than a naturally varying reasoning-token distribution.

Expected behavior

Reasoning-token counts for complex Codex tasks should vary naturally with task complexity and should not disproportionately cluster at exact fixed values for one model family.

Actual behavior

gpt-5.5 responses cluster heavily at exactly 516 reasoning tokens, with related spikes around 1034 and 1552. This pattern is much weaker or absent in several other models.

Ask

Could the Codex team investigate whether gpt-5.5 has a reasoning-budget, routing, truncation, fallback, or scheduler behavior that causes responses to terminate around 516/1034/1552 reasoning tokens?

If this is expected behavior, it would be useful to know whether exact 516 indicates a normal stopping point, a budget cap, a degraded tier, or another internal threshold.

Useful internal validation checks:

  1. Query token_count events with reasoning_output_tokens by model.
  2. Compare exact-value counts for 0, 516, 1034, and 1552.
  3. Compute count(reasoning_output_tokens = 516) / count(reasoning_output_tokens >= 516) by model and day.
  4. Compare gpt-5.5 against gpt-5.2, gpt-5.4, and Codex-specific variants.
  5. Replay matched complex tasks across GPT-5.2 and GPT-5.5 with quality evals, especially separating exact-516 responses from longer-reasoning responses.
联系我们 contact @ memedata.com