It may be the self-aware human bias tainting this reasoning, but it seems convergent with our own psyche/brain processes, and/or inherent to the way we commonly express conscious thoughts.

Percolating tokens that allow a more "accurate" latent space appear to be more accurate, but are nearly actually useless noise. Almost a virtual shower thought.

Because people only put the answer at the end of a grammatically correct statement, with the more "reasoned" statements being more articulately percolated/logically sound, and that is expressed grammatically. These statements are inferred to be associated with intellectual boiler-plate. They may be correlated and not actually causative, but that would require a multiple component architecture with embeddings being used as a proto-"qualia" and that is getting hairy.

Facts should "only" have to be read once, and should be explicitly defined with a more secure of a confidence completely. Implicit inferences from those explicit facts should be emitted from a different, less confident module; with the chat boilerplate being tacitly composed finally when presenting the output to the user.

Of course separating the baby from the bathwater is the hard (not impossible) part.