ICLR 2026 全部接收论文 · 中文导读

Large language models (LLMs) have achieved remarkable success in diverse tasks, yet their safety alignment remains fragile during adaptation. Even when fine-tuning on benign data or with low-rank adaptation, pre-trained safety behaviors are easily degraded, leading to harmful responses in the fine-tuned models. To address this challenge, we propose GuardSpace, a guardrail framework for preserving safety alignment throughout fine-tuning, composed of two key components: a safety-sensitive subspace and a harmful-resistant null space. First, we explicitly decompose pre-trained weights into safety-relevant and safety-irrelevant components using covariance-preconditioned singular value decomposition, and initialize low-rank adapters from the safety-irrelevant ones, while freezing safety-relevant components to preserve their associated safety mechanism. Second, we construct a null space projector that restricts adapter updates from altering safe outputs on harmful prompts, thereby maintaining the original refusal behavior. Experiments with various pre-trained models on multiple downstream tasks demonstrate that GuardSpace achieves superior performance over existing methods. Notably, for Llama-2-7B-Chat fine-tuned on GSM8K, GuardSpace outperforms the state-of-the-art method AsFT, reducing the average harmful score from 14.4\% to 3.6\%, while improving the accuracy from from 26.0\% to 28.0\%.

Trajectory data records the spatio-temporal movements of people and vehicles. However, raw trajectories are often noisy, incomplete, or inconsistent due to sensor errors and transmission failures. To ensure reliable downstream analytics, Trajectory Data Preparation (TDP) has emerged as a critical preprocessing stage, encompassing various tasks such as imputation, map matching, anomaly detection, trajectory recovery, compression, etc. However, existing TDP methods face two major limitations: (i) they assume centralized access to data, which is unrealistic under strict privacy regulations and data silo situations, and (ii) they train task-specific models that lack generalization across diverse or unseen TDP tasks. To this end, we propose FedTDP for Federated Trajectory Data Preparation (F-TDP), where trajectories are vertically partitioned across regions and cannot be directly shared. FedTDP introduces three innovations: (i) lightweight Trajectory Privacy AutoEncoder (TPA) with secret-sharing aggregation, providing formal privacy guarantees; (ii) Trajectory Knowledge Enhancer (TKE) that adapts LLMs to spatio-temporal patterns via trajectory-aware prompts, offsite-tuning, sparse-tuning, and bidirectional knowledge distillation; and (iii) Federated Parallel Optimization (FPO), which reduces communication overhead and accelerates federated training. We conduct experiments on 6 real-world datasets and 10 representative TDP tasks, showing that FedTDP surpasses 13 state-of-the-art baselines in accuracy, efficiency, and scalability, while also generalizing effectively across diverse TDP tasks.

In this work, we investigate the synergy between supervised fine-tuning (SFT) and reinforcement learning (RL) in developing strong reasoning models. We begin by curating the SFT training data through two scaling strategies: increasing the number of collected prompts and the number of generated responses per prompt. Both approaches yield notable improvements in reasoning performance, with scaling the number of prompts resulting in more substantial gains. We then explore the following questions regarding the synergy between SFT and RL: (i) Does a stronger SFT model consistently lead to better final performance after large-scale RL training? (ii) How can we determine an appropriate sampling temperature during RL training to effectively balance exploration and exploitation for a given SFT initialization? Our findings suggest that (i) holds true, provided effective RL training is conducted, particularly when the sampling temperature is carefully chosen to maintain the temperature-adjusted entropy around 0.3, a setting that strikes a good balance between exploration and exploitation. Notably, the performance gap between initial SFT models narrows significantly throughout the RL process. Built on a strong SFT foundation and SFT–RL synergy, our AceReason-Nemotron-1.1 7B model significantly outperforms AceReason-Nemotron-1.0 and achieves new state-of-the-art performance among Qwen2.5-7B-based reasoning models on challenging math and code benchmarks, thereby demonstrating the effectiveness of our post-training recipe.

Controlling the behaviors of large language models (LLMs) is fundamental to their safety alignment and reliable deployment. However, existing steering methods are primarily driven by empirical insights and lack theoretical performance guarantees. In this work, we develop a control-theoretic foundation for activation steering by showing that popular steering methods correspond to the proportional (P) controllers, with the steering vector serving as the feedback signal. Building on this finding, we propose Proportional-Integral-Derivative (PID) Steering, a principled framework that leverages the full PID controller for activation steering in LLMs. The proportional (P) term aligns activations with target semantic directions, the integral (I) term accumulates errors to enforce persistent corrections across layers, and the derivative (D) term mitigates overshoot by counteracting rapid activation changes. This closed-loop design yields interpretable error dynamics and connects activation steering to classical stability guarantees in control theory. Moreover, PID Steering is lightweight, modular, and readily integrates with state-of-the-art steering methods. Extensive experiments across multiple LLM families and benchmarks demonstrate that PID Steering consistently outperforms existing approaches, achieving more robust and reliable behavioral control.

The recent success in using human preferences to align large language models (LLMs) has significantly improved their performance in various downstream tasks, such as question answering, mathematical reasoning, and code generation. However, achieving effective LLM alignment depends on high-quality datasets of human preferences. Collecting these datasets requires human preference annotation, which is costly and resource-intensive, necessitating efficient active data selection methods. Existing methods either lack a strong theoretical foundation or depend on restrictive assumptions about the reward function, such as linear latent reward functions. To this end, we propose an algorithm, ActiveDPO, that uses a theoretically grounded data selection criterion for non-linear reward functions while directly leveraging the LLM itself to parameterize the reward model used for active data selection. As a result, ActiveDPO explicitly accounts for the LLM's influence on data selection, unlike methods that select data without considering the LLM that is being aligned, thereby leading to more effective and efficient data collection. Our extensive experiments demonstrate that ActiveDPO outperforms existing methods across various models and real-world preference datasets.

Post-training of large language models involves a fundamental trade-off between supervised fine-tuning (SFT), which efficiently mimics demonstrations but tends to memorize, and reinforcement learning (RL), which achieves better generaliza- tion at higher computational cost. Dynamic Fine-Tuning (DFT) recently emerged as a promising middle ground, reweighting SFT objectives with token probabili- ties and achieving improvements in certain reasoning domains, though it exhibits instability in other tasks. We provide a analysis of DFT through the reward- weighted regression (RWR) framework, revealing that it corresponds to a spe- cific auxiliary distribution choice that yields provably tighter RL bounds than standard SFT. However, our analysis also uncovers a critical limitation: this con- struction lacks distributional anchoring, leading to progressive drift that under- mines training stability. To address this, we propose Anchored Supervised Fine- Tuning (ASFT), which augments DFT’s reweighting with lightweight KL regu- larization to preserve tightness while ensuring stability. Empirically, ASFT con- sistently outperforms both SFT and DFT across mathematical reasoning, medical knowledge grounding, and code generation, achieving substantial improvements with minimal computational overhead. Our RWR framework provides a system- atic lens for understanding post-training methods and demonstrates that principled theoretical analysis leads to both stronger guarantees and practical gains.

Repetitive lexical patterns in LLM output, termed "slop," degrade writing quality through over-use and make AI-generated text immediately recognizable. We present Antislop, a comprehensive framework providing tools to both detect and eliminate these overused patterns. Our approach combines three innovations: (1) The Antislop Sampler, which uses backtracking to suppress unwanted strings at inference time without destroying vocabulary. (2) An automated pipeline that profiles model-specific slop against human baselines and generates training data. and, (3) Final Token Preference Optimization (FTPO), a novel fine-tuning method that operates in logit-space on individual tokens, surgically adjusting logits wherever a banned pattern has appeared in an inference trace. We demonstrate that some slop patterns appear over 1,000 times more frequently in LLM output than human text. The Antislop Sampler successfully suppresses 8,000+ patterns while maintaining quality, whereas token banning becomes unusable at just 2,000. Most importantly, FTPO achieves 90% slop reduction while maintaining or improving performance in cross-domain evals including GSM8K, MMLU, and creative writing tasks. In contrast, DPO suffers significant degradation in writing quality and lexical diversity despite achieving weaker suppression. We release all code and results datasets under MIT license.

Reinforcement learning (RL) has become a central paradigm for post-training large language models (LLMs) to elicit stronger reasoning. Yet, most recent RL for LLMs (RL4LLM) methods avoid explicit critics, replacing them with average advantage baselines. This shift is largely pragmatic: conventional value functions are computationally expensive to train at LLM scale and often fail under sparse rewards and long reasoning horizons. We revisit this bottleneck from an architectural perspective and introduce Asymmetric Proximal Policy Optimization (**AsyPPO**), a simple and scalable framework that restores the critic’s role while remaining efficient in large-model settings. **AsyPPO** employs a set of lightweight *mini-critics*, each trained on disjoint prompt shards. This design encourages diversity while preserving calibration, reducing value-estimation bias. Beyond robust estimation, **AsyPPO** leverages inter-critic uncertainty to refine the policy update: (i) masking advantages in states where critics agree and gradients add little learning signal, and (ii) filtering high-divergence states from entropy regularization, suppressing spurious exploration. Across multiple reasoning benchmarks, **AsyPPO** consistently improves learning stability and performance over strong baselines, e.g., GRPO, achieving performance gains of $> 6$% on *Qwen3-4b-Base* and about $3$% on *Qwen3-8b-Base* and *Qwen3-14b-Base* over classic PPO. Such results highlight the importance of architectural innovations in critics for scalable, efficient algorithms.

Writing competitive programming problems is exacting. Authors must: set constraints, input distributions, and edge cases that rule out shortcuts; target specific algorithms (e.g., max-flow, dynamic programming, data structures); and calibrate complexity beyond the reach of most competitors. We argue that this makes for an ideal test of general large language model capabilities and study whether they can do this reliably. We introduce AutoCode, which uses multiple rounds of validation to yield competition-grade problem statements and test cases. On held-out problems, AutoCode test suites approach 99% consistency with official judgments, a significant improvement over current state-of-the-art methods like HardTests, which achieve less than 81%. Furthermore, starting with a random seed problem, AutoCode can create novel variants with reference and brute-force solutions. By cross-verifying these generated solutions against test cases, we can further filter out malformed problems. Our system ensures high correctness, as verified by human experts. AutoCode successfully produces novel problems judged by Grandmaster-level (top 0.3%) competitive programmers to be of contest quality.

Evaluating user-facing AI applications remains a central challenge, especially in open-ended domains such as travel planning, clinical note generation, or dialogue. The gold standard is user feedback (e.g., thumbs up/down) or behavioral signals (e.g., retention), but these are often scarce in prototypes and research projects, or too-slow to use for system optimization. We present **AutoMetrics**, a framework for synthesizing evaluation metrics under low-data constraints. AutoMetrics combines retrieval from **MetricBank**, a collection of 48 metrics we curate, with automatically generated LLM-as-a-Judge criteria informed by lightweight human feedback. These metrics are composed via regression to maximize correlation with human signal. AutoMetrics takes you from expensive measures to interpretable automatic metrics. Across 5 diverse tasks, AutoMetrics improves Kendall correlation with human ratings by up to 33.4% over LLM-as-a-Judge while requiring fewer than 100 feedback points. We show that AutoMetrics can be used as a proxy reward to equal effect as a verifiable reward. We release the full AutoMetrics toolkit and MetricBank to accelerate adaptive evaluation of LLM applications.

Reinforcement learning (RL) has recently become the core paradigm for aligning and strengthening large language models (LLMs). Yet, applying RL in off-policy settings—where stale data from past policies are used for training—improves sample efficiency, but remains challenging: policy entropy declines sharply, optimization often becomes unstable and may even collapse. Through theoretical and empirical analysis, we identify two key insights: (i) an imbalance in optimization, where negative-advantage samples dominate the policy gradient, suppressing useful behaviors and risking gradient explosions; and (ii) the derived Entropy-Clip Rule, which reveals that the fixed clipping mechanism in PPO-like objectives systematically blocks entropy-increasing updates, thereby driving the policy toward over-exploitation at the expense of exploration. Building on these insights, we propose BAlanced Policy Optimization with Adaptive Clipping (BAPO), a simple yet effective method that dynamically adjusts clipping bounds to adaptively re-balance positive and negative contributions, preserve entropy, and stabilize RL optimization. Across diverse off-policy scenarios—including sample replay and partial rollout—BAPO achieves fast, stable, and data-efficient training. On AIME 2024 and AIME 2025 benchmarks, our 7B BAPO model surpasses open-source counterparts such as SkyWork-OR1-7B, while our 32B BAPO model not only achieves state-of-the-art results among models of the same scale but also outperforms leading proprietary systems like o3-mini and Gemini-2.5-Flash-Thinking.

Reinforcement finetuning (RFT) is a key technique for aligning Large Language Models (LLMs) with human preferences and enhancing reasoning, yet its effectiveness is highly sensitive to which tasks are explored during training. Uniform task sampling is inefficient, wasting computation on tasks that are either trivial or unsolvable, while existing task selection methods often suffer from high rollout costs, poor adaptivity, or incomplete evidence. We introduce \textbf{BOTS}, a unified framework for \textbf{B}ayesian \textbf{O}nline \textbf{T}ask \textbf{S}election in LLM reinforcement finetuning. Grounded in Bayesian inference, BOTS adaptively maintains posterior estimates of task difficulty as the model evolves. It jointly incorporates \emph{explicit evidence} from direct evaluations of selected tasks and \emph{implicit evidence} inferred from these evaluations for unselected tasks, with Thompson sampling ensuring a principled balance between exploration and exploitation for task selection. To make implicit evidence practical, we instantiate it with an ultra-light interpolation-based plug-in that estimates difficulties of unevaluated tasks without extra rollouts, adding negligible overhead. Empirically, across diverse domains and LLM scales, BOTS consistently improves data efficiency and performance over baselines and ablations, providing a practical and extensible solution for dynamic task selection in RFT.

Parameter-efficient Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) architectures, such as LoRA-MoE, enable strong and generalizable fine-tuning. However, a critical problem arises when fine-tuning these architectures with advanced reinforcement learning algorithms such as Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO). Traditional supervised techniques are not naturally compatible with the GRPO objective, and naive combinations fail to effectively address routing collapse and the underutilization of MoE adapter parameters. To resolve this disconnect, we introduce Routing-Optimized Group Relative Policy Optimization (RO-GRPO), a mechanism-aware framework. It turns internal expert routing statistics collected during training into a direct reward signal, seamlessly integrating routing supervision into the reinforcement fine-tuning (RFT) process. This enables effective optimization of parameter utilization and improves performance on both unimodal and multimodal mathematical reasoning tasks, all without extra training stages. Our work provides the first demonstration that a scalar reward in GRPO can be engineered from a model's own internal mechanics to explicitly guide its optimization, extending alignment from mere behavior tuning to holistic mechanism alignment.

When language models (LMs) are trained via reinforcement learning (RL) to generate natural language “reasoning chains”, their performance improves on a variety of difficult question answering tasks. Today, almost all successful applications of RL for reasoning use binary reward functions that evaluate the correctness of LM outputs. Because such reward functions do not penalize guessing or low-confidence outputs, they often have the unintended side-effect of degrading calibration and increasing the rate at which LMs generate incorrect responses (or “hallucinate”) in other problem domains. This paper describes RLCR (Reinforcement Learning with Calibration Rewards), an approach to training reasoning models that jointly improves accuracy and calibrated confidence estimation. During RLCR, LMs generate both predictions and numerical confidence estimates after reasoning. They are trained to optimize a reward function that augments a binary correctness score with a Brier score—a scoring rule for confidence estimates that incentivizes calibrated prediction. We first prove that this reward function (or any analogous reward function that uses a bounded, proper scoring rule) yields models whose predictions are both accurate and well-calibrated. We next show that across diverse datasets, RLCR substantially improves calibration with no loss in accuracy, on both in-domain and out-of-domain evaluations—outperforming both ordinary RL training and classifiers trained to assign post-hoc confidence scores. While ordinary RL hurts calibration, RLCR improves it. Finally, we demonstrate that verbalized confidence can be leveraged at test time to improve accuracy and calibration via confidence-weighted scaling methods. Our results show that explicitly optimizing for calibration can produce more generally reliable reasoning models.

The performance of Large Language Models (LLMs) hinges on carefully engineered prompts. However, prevailing prompt optimization methods, ranging from heuristic edits and reinforcement learning to evolutionary search, primarily target point-wise accuracy. They seldom enforce paraphrase invariance or searching stability, and therefore cannot remedy this brittleness in practice. Automated prompt search remains brittle: small, semantically preserving paraphrases often cause large performance swings. We identify this brittleness as the **textual sharpness** of the **prompt landscape**. In this work, we provide the first formal treatment of textual sharpness in the discrete, semantic space of prompts, together with an operational robustness criterion over a semantic neighborhood; the design is black-box or API-only, requiring no gradients to update the model's parameters. Then we introduce **TARE** (Textual Sharpness-Aware Evolving), a derivative-free framework that alternates between an inner, sampling-based adversarial search that stresses a prompt with hard paraphrases and an outer, robust selection that prefers candidates whose neighborhoods remain strong. We further propose **ATARE**, which learns anisotropic weights to shape the semantic neighborhood and adapts its radius over time to balance exploration and fidelity. Diverse tasks evaluate our methods, whose design for minimizing textual sharpness gap leads to prompts that preserve accuracy under paraphrasing, outperforming accuracy-only prompt search while remaining computationally practical. The code is available for anonymous access at https://anonymous.4open.science/r/ATARE_TARE/.

Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) has recently emerged as a key paradigm for post-training Large Language Models (LLMs), particularly for complex reasoning tasks. However, vanilla RLVR training has been shown to improve Pass@1 performance at the expense of policy entropy, leading to reduced generation diversity and limiting the Pass@k performance, which typically represents the upper bound of LLM reasoning capability. In this paper, we systematically analyze the policy's generation diversity from the perspective of training problems and find that augmenting and updating training problems helps mitigate entropy collapse during training. Based on these observations, we propose an online Self-play with Variational problem Synthesis (SvS) strategy for RLVR training, which uses the policy's correct solutions to synthesize variational problems while ensuring their reference answers remain identical to the originals. This self-improving strategy effectively maintains policy entropy during training and substantially improves Pass@k compared with standard RLVR, sustaining prolonged improvements and achieving absolute gains of 18.3% and 22.8% in Pass@32 performance on the competition-level AIME24 and AIME25 benchmarks. Experiments on 12 reasoning benchmarks across varying model sizes from 3B to 32B consistently demonstrate the generalizability and robustness of SvS.

Multi-domain reinforcement learning (RL) for large language models (LLMs) involves highly intricate reward surfaces, posing significant challenges in finding parameters that excel across all domains. Recent empirical studies have further highlighted conflicts among domains, where gains in one capability often come at the expense of another. However, approaches to mitigate such conflicts and enhance multi-domain reasoning remain largely underexplored. To address this challenge, we propose **C**urvature-**G**uided **P**olicy **O**ptimization (**CGPO**), a principled and scalable training framework to advance the multi-domain reasoning of LLMs. Inspired by Newton's method, CGPO exploits the geometric structure in the reward surface, while sidestepping the prohibitive cost of Hessian computation. At each update, CGPO processes domains in random order, preconditioning their gradients with curvature information from other domains to foster richer cross-domain interactions. This mechanism further promotes implicit gradient alignment by maximizing inter-domain inner products in expectation, steering the parameters toward regions that jointly enhance multi-domain performance. Extensive experiments on a mixed dataset covering math, coding, science, and creative writing, evaluated across seven widely-used benchmarks, show that CGPO significantly outperforms all baselines in terms of faster reward improvement and stronger multi-domain capability.

Reward models trained on human preference data have demonstrated strong effectiveness in aligning Large Language Models (LLMs) with human intent under the framework of Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF). However, RLHF remains vulnerable to reward hacking, where the policy exploits imperfections in the reward function rather than genuinely learning the intended behavior. Although significant efforts have been made to mitigate reward hacking, they predominantly focus on and evaluate in-distribution scenarios, where the training and testing data for the reward model share the same distribution. In this paper, we empirically show that state-of-the-art methods struggle in more challenging out-of-distribution (OOD) settings. We further demonstrate that incorporating fine-grained multi-attribute scores helps address this challenge. However, the limited availability of high-quality data often leads to weak performance of multi-objective reward functions, which can negatively impact overall performance and become the bottleneck. To address this issue, we propose a unified reward modeling framework that jointly trains Bradley-Terry (BT) single-objective and multi-objective regression-based reward functions using a shared embedding space. We theoretically establish a connection between the BT loss and the regression objective and highlight their complementary benefits. Specifically, the regression task enhances the single-objective reward function’s ability to mitigate reward hacking in challenging OOD settings, while BT-based training improves the scoring capability of the multi-objective reward function, enabling a 7B model to outperform a 70B baseline. Extensive experimental results demonstrate that our framework significantly improves both the robustness and the scoring performance of reward models.

While reinforcement learning (RL) has proven highly effective for general reasoning in vision-language models, its application to tasks requiring deep understanding of information-rich images and structured output generation remains underexplored. Chart-to-code generation exemplifies this challenge, demanding complex reasoning over visual charts to produce structured code. Supervised fine-tuning (SFT) alone is often insufficient, highlighting the need for effective RL strategies tailored to structured outputs. In this paper, we systematically investigate the performance plateau of SFT through large-scale experiments and propose Multimodal Structured Reinforcement Learning (MSRL) for chart-to-code generation. We construct the largest training corpus to date, with 3 million chart-code pairs curated from real-world tables in arXiv papers, addressing the limitations of previous synthetic datasets. Despite achieving state-of-the-art performance, our experiments show that simply increasing SFT data eventually leads to diminishing improvements. To break this plateau, MSRL employs a multi-granularity reward system that integrates both textual and visual feedback. At the textual level, rule-based rewards validate fine-grained code details, while at the visual level, a model-based reward assesses the structural similarity between rendered code and ground-truth charts. We implement a two-stage curriculum training strategy, first optimizing the model with textual rewards and then incorporating visual signals for further enhancement. Experimental results demonstrate that MSRL substantially breaks the SFT plateau, improving high-level metrics by 6.2% and 9.9% on ChartMimic and ReachQA benchmarks, respectively. Notably, our method outperforms all existing approaches in the chart domain and achieves competitive results with advanced closed-source models.

The LLM unlearning aims to eliminate the influence of undesirable data without affecting causally unrelated information. This process typically involves using a **forget set** to remove target information, alongside a **retain set** to maintain non-target capabilities. While recent localization-based methods demonstrate promise in identifying important nodes (neurons) to be unlearned, they fail to disentangle nodes responsible for forgetting undesirable knowledge or retaining essential skills, often treating them as a single entangled group. As a result, these methods apply uniform interventions, risking catastrophic over-forgetting or incomplete erasure of the target knowledge. To address this, we turn to circuit discovery, a mechanistic interpretability technique, and propose the **C**onflict-guided **L**ocalization for LLM **U**nlearning fram**E**work (**CLUE**). This framework identifies the forget and retain circuit composed of important nodes, and then the circuits are transformed into conjunctive normal forms (CNF). The assignment of each node in the CNF satisfiability solution reveals whether it should be forgotten or retained. We then provide targeted fine-tuning strategies for different categories of nodes. Extensive experiments demonstrate that, compared to existing localization methods, CLUE achieves superior forget efficacy and retain utility through precise neural localization.

Activation steering methods enable inference-time control of large language model (LLM) behavior without retraining, but current approaches face a fundamental trade-off: sample-efficient methods suboptimally capture steering signals from labeled examples, while methods that better extract these signals require hundreds to thousands of examples. We introduce COLD-Steer, a training-free framework that steers LLM activations by approximating the representational changes that would result from gradient descent on in-context examples. Our key insight is that the effect of fine-tuning on a small set of examples can be efficiently approximated at inference time without actual parameter updates. We formalize this through two complementary approaches: (i) a unit kernel approximation method that updates the activations directly using gradients with respect to them, normalized across examples, and (ii) a finite-difference approximation requiring only two forward passes regardless of example count. Experiments across a variety of steering tasks and benchmarks demonstrate that COLD-Steer achieves upto 95\% steering effectiveness while using 50 times fewer samples compared to the best baseline. COLD-Steer enables real-time adaptation to new steering objectives and facilitates accommodating diverse perspectives without extensive demonstration data, which we validate through our experiments on pluralistic alignment tasks. Our framework opens new possibilities for adaptive, context-aware model control that can flexibly address varying loss-driven human preferences through principled approximation of learning dynamics rather than specialized training procedures.

Instruction fine-tuning is a key technique for enhancing the performance of large language models (LLMs), but low-quality and redundant data often hinder its effectiveness. Recent studies suggest that filtering a small amount of high-quality data for instruction fine-tuning can achieve faster and more efficient training performance. However, existing data filtering approaches predominantly depend on predefined evaluation models or manually designed metrics, without leveraging information from the target LLM itself. This limitation may result in a mismatch between the filtering criteria and the actual requirements of the LLM being fine-tuned, thereby reducing the effectiveness of the fine-tuning process. To address these issues, we propose a novel perspective: the hidden states of LLMs implicitly reflect the quality of the training data. Based on this insight, we propose a novel data filtering method that extracts the hidden states that reflect the target LLM’s perception of the data as representative features, and builds a data classification model upon them, which outputs the Contrastive Perception Quality Score (CPQS) for dataset filtering. Our experiments are conducted in both general and downstream domains. (1) In the general domain, our experiments show that training on under 10\% of the data from both the Alpaca\_GPT4 and DeepSeek-R1 synthesized reasoning datasets enables our method to outperform models trained on the complete datasets. Moreover, it surpasses the performance of current state-of-the-art data-selection techniques. (2) In downstream tasks, our approach delivers an average performance gain exceeding 3.6\% over leading data-selection algorithms across multiple benchmarks, including GSM8K, HumanEval, and HumanEval-Plus.

Calibrated confidence estimates are necessary for large language model (LLM) outputs to be trusted by human users. While LLMs can express their confidence in human-interpretable ways, verbalized LLM-generated confidence scores have empirically been found to be miscalibrated, reporting high confidence on instances with low accuracy and thereby harming trust and safety. We hypothesize that this overconfidence often stems from a given LLM’s heightened suggestibility when faced with claims that it encodes little information about; we empirically validate this hypothesis, finding more suggestibility on lower-accuracy claims. Building on this finding, we introduce Distractor-Normalized Coherence (DINCO), which estimates and accounts for an LLM’s suggestibility bias by having the model verbalize its confidence independently across several self-generated distractors (i.e. alternative claims), and normalizes by the total verbalized confidence. To further improve calibration, we leverage generator-validator disagreement, augmenting normalized validator confidence with a consistency-based estimate of generator confidence. Here, we frame the popular approach of self-consistency as leveraging coherence across sampled generations, and normalized verbalized confidence as leveraging coherence across validations on incompatible claims, allowing us to integrate these complementary dimensions of coherence into DINCO. Moreover, our analysis shows that DINCO provides less saturated – and therefore more usable – confidence estimates, and that further sampling alone cannot close the gap between DINCO and baselines, with DINCO at 10 runs outperforming self-consistency at 100. We release our code at https://github.com/victorwang37/dinco.

Image captioning is a fundamental task that bridges the visual and linguistic domains, playing a critical role in pre-training Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs). Current state-of-the-art captioning models are typically trained with Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT), a paradigm that relies on expensive, non-scalable data annotated by humans or proprietary models. This approach often leads to models that memorize specific ground-truth answers, limiting their generality and ability to generate diverse, creative descriptions. To overcome the limitation of SFT, we propose applying the Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) paradigm to the open-ended task of image captioning. A primary challenge, however, is designing an objective reward function for the inherently subjective nature of what constitutes a "good" caption. We introduce Captioning Reinforce- ment Learning (CapRL), a novel training framework that redefines caption quality through its utility: a high-quality caption should enable a non-visual language model to accurately answer questions about the corresponding image. CapRL employs a decoupled two-stage pipeline where an LVLM generates a caption, and the objective reward is derived from the accuracy of a separate, vision-free LLM answering Multiple-Choice Questions based solely on that caption. As the first study to apply RLVR to the subjective image captioning task, we demonstrate that CapRL significantly enhances multiple settings. Pretraining on the CapRL- 5M caption dataset annotated by CapRL-3B results in substantial gains across 12 benchmarks. Moreover, within the Prism Framework for caption quality evaluation, CapRL achieves performance comparable to Qwen2.5-VL-72B, while exceeding the baseline by an average margin of 8.4%. Results validate that our CapRL effec- tively trains models to produce a more general and accurate image descriptions, moving beyond the limitations of traditional SFT-based image captioning models.

Interpreting clinical electroencephalography (EEG) is a laborious, subjective process, and existing computational models are limited to narrow classification tasks rather than holistic interpretation. A key bottleneck for applying powerful Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) to this domain is the scarcity of datasets pairing EEG visualizations with fine-grained, expert-level annotations. We address this by introducing CerebraGloss, an instruction-tuned LVLM for nuanced EEG interpretation. We first introduce a novel, automated data generation pipeline, featuring a bespoke YOLO-based waveform detector, to programmatically create a large-scale corpus of EEG-text instruction data. Using this data, we develop CerebraGloss, the first model of its kind capable of unified, generative analysis—performing tasks from detailed waveform description to multi-turn, context-aware dialogue. To evaluate this new capability, we construct and release CerebraGloss-Bench, a comprehensive benchmark for open-ended EEG interpretation. CerebraGloss demonstrates strong performance, surpassing leading LVLMs, including proprietary models like GPT-5, on this benchmark and achieving a new state-of-the-art on the TUSZ seizure detection task. Models, benchmark and tools are available at https://github.com/iewug/CerebraGloss.

Reinforcement fine-tuning (RFT) often suffers from reward over-optimization, where a policy model hacks the reward signals to achieve high scores while producing low-quality outputs. Our theoretical analysis shows that the key lies in reward misspecification at the high-reward tail: the inability to reliably distinguish excellent responses from merely great ones. This motivate us to focus on the high-reward region. However, such tail examples are scarce under the base LLM. While off-policy exemplars (e.g. from stronger models or rewrites) are easier to obtain, naively training on them yields a misspecified reward for the policy we aim to align. To address this, we study rubric-based rewards. By design, rubrics can leverage off-policy examples while remaining insensitive to their artifacts. To elicit rubrics that capture the high-reward tail, we highlight the importance of distinguishing among great and diverse responses, and introduce a workflow to implement this idea. We empirically demonstrate that rubric-based rewards substantially mitigate reward over-optimization and deliver effective LLM post-training improvements.

Pretrained language models can acquire novel tasks either through in-context learning (ICL)---adapting behavior via activations without weight updates---or through supervised fine-tuning (SFT), where parameters are explicitly updated. Prior work has reported differences in their generalization performance and inductive biases, but the origins of these differences remain poorly understood. In this work, we treat ICL and SFT as distinct learning algorithms and directly compare the learning dynamics they induce across medium-sized models, analyzing both the evolution of their inductive biases and the underlying internal representations. We find that ICL preserves rich input representations but imposes stronger priors inherited from pretraining, whereas SFT suppresses task-irrelevant features---potentially explaining its weaker generalization in few-shot regimes. These results highlight a mechanistic distinction between context-driven and weight-driven learning.

Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) for large language models (LLMs) has achieved remarkable progress in enhancing LLMs’ reasoning capabilities on tasks with clear correctness criteria, such as mathematical reasoning tasks. Several training metrics, such as entropy or response length, have been observed to correlate with different reasoning behaviors in reinforcement learning. Prior approaches incorporate such priors through reward or advantage shaping, which often relies on hand-crafted penalties and preferences (e.g., higher-is-better or lower-is-better). However, without careful hyper-parameter tuning, these directional priors can be overly biased and may lead to failure. To this end, we introduce ***C****onditional adv****AN****tage estimati****ON*** (***CANON***), amplifying the impact of the target metric without presuming its direction. Specifically, *CANON* regroups the sampled responses into two groups based on the higher or lower value of a target metric, measures which metric trend contributes to better performance through inter-group comparison, and identifies the better response within the same group. In summary, *CANON* based on entropy consistently outperforms prior methods across three LLMs on both math reasoning and high-complexity logic tasks. When applied to response length, *CANON* further improves token efficiency, yielding a more favorable Pareto frontier in the performance–cost trade-off.

We introduce enhanced Constitutional Classifiers that deliver production-grade jailbreak robustness with dramatically reduced computational costs and refusal rates compared to previous-generation defenses. Our system combines several key insights. First, we develop exchange classifiers that evaluate model responses in their full conversational context, which addresses vulnerabilities in last-generation systems that examine outputs in isolation. Second, we implement a two-stage classifier cascade where lightweight classifiers screen all traffic and escalate only suspicious exchanges to more expensive classifiers. Third, we train efficient linear probe classifiers and ensemble them with external classifiers to simultaneously improve robustness and reduce computational costs. Together, these techniques yield a production-grade system achieving a 40x computational cost reduction compared to our baseline exchange classifier, while maintaining a 0.05% refusal rate on production traffic. Through extensive red-teaming comprising over 1,700 hours, we demonstrate strong protection against universal jailbreaks---no attack on this system successfully elicited responses to all eight target queries comparable in detail to an undefended model. Our work establishes Constitutional Classifiers as practical and efficient safeguards for large language models.

Reinforcement Learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) has emerged as a primary learning paradigm for enhancing the reasoning capabilities of multi-modal large language models (MLLMs). However, during RL training, the enormous state space of MLLM and sparse rewards often leads to entropy collapse, policy degradation, or over-exploitation of suboptimal behaviors. This necessitates an exploration strategy that maintains productive stochasticity while avoiding the drawbacks of uncontrolled random sampling, yielding inefficient exploration. In this paper, we propose CalibRL, a hybrid-policy RLVR framework that supports controllable exploration with expert guidance, enabled by two key mechanisms. First, a distribution-aware advantage weighting scales updates by group rareness to calibrate the distribution, therefore preserving exploration. Meanwhile, the asymmetric activation function (LeakyReLU) leverages the expert knowledge as a calibration baseline to moderate overconfident updates while preserving their corrective direction. CalibRL increases policy entropy in a guided manner and clarifies the target distribution by estimating the on-policy distribution through online sampling. Updates are driven by these informative behaviors, avoiding convergence to erroneous patterns. Importantly, these designs help alleviate the distributional mismatch between the model’s policy and expert trajectories, thereby achieving a more stable balance between exploration and exploitation. Extensive experiments across eight benchmarks, including both in-domain and out-of-domain settings, demonstrate consistent improvements, validating the effectiveness of our controllable hybrid-policy RLVR training. Code is available at https://github.com/zhh6425/CalibRL.

While Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) enables large language models (LLMs) to generate contextually grounded responses, contextual faithfulness remains challenging as LLMs may not consistently trust provided context, leading to hallucinations that undermine reliability. We observe an inverse correlation between response copying degree and context-unfaithful hallucinations on RAGTruth, suggesting higher copying degrees reduce hallucinations by fostering genuine contextual belief. We propose Copy-Paste, a generation paradigm that directly embeds contextual fragments to ensure faithfulness, and instantiate it through CopyPasteLLM via two-stage high-copying preference training. We design three prompting methods to enhance copying degree, demonstrating that high-copying responses achieve superior contextual faithfulness and hallucination control. These approaches enable a fully automated pipeline that transforms generated responses into high-copying preference data for training CopyPasteLLM. On FaithEval, ConFiQA and PubMedQA, CopyPasteLLM achieves best performance in both counterfactual and original contexts, remarkably with 12.2\% to 24.5\% accuracy improvements on FaithEval over the best baseline, while requiring only 365 training samples—1/50th of baseline data. To elucidate CopyPasteLLM's effectiveness, we propose the Context-Parameter Copying Capturing algorithm. Interestingly, this reveals that CopyPasteLLM recalibrates reliance on internal parametric knowledge rather than external knowledge during generation. All codes are available at https://github.com/longyongchao/CopyPasteLLM

Large language models (LLMs) do not preserve privacy at inference-time. The LLM's outputs can inadvertently reveal information about the model's context, which presents a privacy challenge when the LLM is augmented via tools or databases containing sensitive information. Existing privacy-preserving methods at inference-time have significant limitations since they (i) lack provable guarantees or (ii) have a poor utility/privacy trade-off. We propose DP-Fusion, a Differentially Private Inference (DPI) mechanism for LLMs that provably bounds the influence a set of tokens in the context can have on the LLM's output. DP-Fusion works as follows: (1) label a subset of sensitive tokens, (2) infer the LLM without any sensitive tokens to obtain a baseline, (3) infer the LLM with the sensitive tokens, and (4) blend distributions so that the final output remains within a bounded distance of the baseline distribution. While this per-token influence bound also mitigates jailbreak-style prompt injection, we focus on document privatization, where the goal is to paraphrase a document containing sensitive tokens, e.g., personally identifiable information, so that no attacker can reliably infer them from the paraphrased document while preserving high text quality. The privacy/utility trade-off is controlled by $\epsilon$, where $\epsilon=0$ hides sensitive tokens entirely, while higher values trade off privacy for improved text quality. We show that our method creates token-level provably privatized documents with substantially improved theoretical and empirical privacy, achieving $6\times$ lower perplexity than related DPI methods.

$N$-gram novelty is widely used to evaluate language models' ability to generate text outside of their training data. More recently, it has also been adopted as a metric for measuring textual creativity. However, theoretical work on creativity suggests that this approach may be inadequate, as it does not account for creativity's dual nature: novelty (how original the text is) and appropriateness (how sensical and pragmatic it is). We investigate the relationship between this notion of creativity and $n$-gram novelty through 8,618 expert writer annotations of novelty, pragmaticality, and sensicality via \emph{close reading} of human- and AI-generated text. We find that while $n$-gram novelty is positively associated with expert writer-judged creativity, approximately 91% of top-quartile $n$-gram novel expressions are not judged as creative, cautioning against relying on $n$-gram novelty alone. Furthermore, unlike in human-written text, higher $n$-gram novelty in open-source LLMs correlates with lower pragmaticality. In an exploratory study with frontier closed-source models, we additionally confirm that they are less likely to produce creative expressions than humans. Using our dataset, we test whether zero-shot, few-shot, and finetuned models are able to identify expressions perceived as novel by experts (a positive aspect of writing) or non-pragmatic (a negative aspect). Overall, frontier LLMs exhibit performance much higher than random but leave room for improvement, especially struggling to identify non-pragmatic expressions. We further find that LLM-as-a-Judge novelty ratings align with expert writer preferences in an out-of-distribution dataset, more so than an n-gram based metric.

Fine-tuning is a critical step for adapting large language models (LLMs) to domain-specific downstream tasks. To mitigate the substantial computational and memory costs of full-model fine-tuning, Parameter-Efficient Fine-Tuning (PEFT) methods have been proposed to update only a small subset of model parameters. However, performance gaps between PEFT approaches and full-model fine-tuning still exist. In this work, we present *DiaBlo*, a simple yet effective PEFT approach that updates only the diagonal blocks of selected model weight matrices. Unlike Low-Rank Adaptation (LoRA) and its variants, DiaBlo eliminates the need for low-rank matrix products, thereby avoiding the reliance on auxiliary initialization schemes or customized optimization strategies to improve convergence. This design leads to stable and robust convergence while maintaining comparable memory efficiency and training speed to LoRA. Moreover, we provide theoretical guarantees showing that, under mild low-rank conditions, DiaBlo is more expressive than LoRA in the linear problem and converges to a stationary point of the general nonlinear full fine-tuning. Through extensive experiments across a range of tasks—including commonsense reasoning, arithmetic reasoning, code generation, and safety alignment—we show that fine-tuning only diagonal blocks is sufficient for strong and consistent performance. DiaBlo not only achieves competitive accuracy but also preserves high memory efficiency and fast fine-tuning speed. Codes are available at https://github.com/ziyangjoy/DiaBlo.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive generalization ability by learning from extensive unlabeled text. However, they still exhibit reasoning mistakes, which can affect their trustworthiness and reliability. Although users can interact with LLMs and provide diverse and comprehensive queries to expose the flaws of LLMs, obtaining sufficient and effective feedback is demanding. Furthermore, comprehensively evaluating LLMs with limited labeled samples is difficult. These make it a challenge to diagnose and remedy the deficiencies in LLMs through rich label-free user queries. To tackle this challenge and considersing that LLMs' reasoning mistakes often stem from knowledge deficiencies, we propose label-free curricular meaningful learning (LaMer), which first employs relative entropy to diagnose and quantify knowledge deficiencies of LLMs in a label-free setting. Then, LaMer adaptively synthesizes augmentation data based on deficiency severity and progressively remedies them with a curricular remedy strategy. Experiments show that LaMer effectively diagnoses and remedies knowledge deficiencies in LLMs, improving various LLMs across seven out-of-distribution (OOD) reasoning benchmarks, achieving comparable results to baselines with only 40% training data. LaMer even surpasses methods that rely on labeled data for deficiency diagnosis. In application, LaMer offers a diagnostic tool for efficient LLM development.

Reasoning abilities of large language models (LLMs) require explicit derivations compared to general question-answering, supervised fine-tuning (SFT) can empower multiple reasoning abilities in LLMs via learning from various datasets. However, neither training the datasets jointly (mix-up) nor continually can maintain the performance of single-dataset SFT, sometimes better while sometimes even worse, illustrating vanilla SFT can not only facilitate reasoning abilities but also introduce conflicts. In this paper, we propose a novel framework to mitigate the conflicts and preserve benefits among different reasoning tasks, and even surpass each task's single dataset SFT performance. We start by exploring the differences between reasoning fine-tuned and base LLMs by analyzing their parameter variations during model inference, and we discover that each reasoning capability has exclusive parameters that benefit it more evidently than others. In contrast, the overlapped parameters of tasks can bring benefits or conflicts. Inspired by the findings, we propose to update the exclusive and overlapped parameters according to specific reasoning task combinations differentially, thereby avoiding unnecessary conflicts while maintaining benefits. Consistent improvements in mix-up and continual SFT experiments demonstrate that the proposed SFT strategy can achieve better performance on various LLMs (Llama3-8B, Mistral-7B, and Qwen2.5-14B) and diverse reasoning tasks with fewer conflicts, showing the superiority and generality of our analysis findings and the proposed approach.

Diffusion large language models (dLLMs) are compelling alternatives to autoregressive (AR) models because their denoising models operate over the entire sequence. The global planning and iterative refinement features of dLLMs are particularly useful for code generation. However, current training and inference mechanisms for dLLMs in coding are still under-explored. To demystify the decoding behavior of dLLMs and unlock their potential for coding, we systematically investigate their denoising processes and reinforcement learning (RL) methods. We train a 7B dLLM, DiffuCoder, on 130B tokens of code. Using this model as a testbed, we analyze its decoding behavior, revealing how it differs from that of AR models: (1) dLLMs can decide how causal their generation should be without relying on semi-AR decoding, and (2) increasing the sampling temperature diversifies not only token choices but also their generation order. This diversity creates a rich search space for RL rollouts. For RL training, to reduce the variance of token log-likelihood estimates and maintain training efficiency, we propose coupled-GRPO, a novel sampling scheme that constructs complementary mask noise for completions used in training. In our experiments, coupled-GRPO significantly improves DiffuCoder's performance on code generation benchmarks (+4.4\% on EvalPlus) and reduces reliance on AR bias during decoding. Our work provides deeper insight into the machinery of dLLM generation and offers an effective, diffusion-native RL training framework.

Large language models (LLMs) aligned for safety often suffer from over-refusal—the tendency to reject seemingly toxic or benign prompts by misclassifying them as toxic. This behavior undermines models' helpfulness and restricts usability in sensitive or nuanced contexts. While prior work has proposed mitigation strategies such as data augmentation and activation steering, these approaches often face a trade-off: reducing over-refusal typically degrades the model’s ability to reject genuinely harmful content. We argue that this issue arises from the ambiguous influence of toxic and seemingly toxic prompts on the model’s learning dynamics. To address it, we introduce a preceding alignment stage, DCR: $\textbf{D}$iscernment via $\textbf{C}$ontrastive $\textbf{R}$efinement. Both theoretically and empirically, we demonstrate that contrastive refinement improves an LLM’s capacity to distinguish truly toxic prompts from superficially toxic ones. Evaluation across diverse benchmarks shows that our method effectively reduces over-refusal while preserving the safety benefits of alignment. Importantly, it achieves this with minimal degradation of general capabilities, offering a more principled and robust direction for safety alignment.

While adversarial fine-tuning can enhance the robustness of vision-language models (VLMs), such approaches are computationally expensive. Adversarial prompt tuning has emerged as a practical alternative. However, existing methods are limited by their reliance on vulnerable continuous image features. To mitigate the vulnerability in the feature representation, we propose **DEFEAT** (**D**iscrete Lat**E**nt **F**eatur**E** based **A**dversarial **T**raining), a robust prompt tuning framework for VLMs. Specifically, the DEFEAT method introduces a perturbation discrete shield module that reconstructs discrete latent features and designs a logits fusion strategy, substantially reducing the discrepancy between clean and adversarial image representations. Moreover, the DEFEAT method integrates prompt tuning with adversarial training while applying regularization from learnable prompts to hand-crafted prompts, further enhancing the adversarial robustness. Extensive experiments across 15 datasets validate the effectiveness of the proposed DEFEAT method among existing adversarial prompt tuning methods. The official code is available at https://github.com/cheny02/DEFEAT-ICLR2026.

Knowledge Editing has emerged as a promising solution for efficiently updating embedded knowledge in large language models (LLMs). While existing approaches demonstrate effectiveness in integrating new knowledge and preserving the original capabilities of LLMs, they fail to maintain fine-grained irrelevant knowledge, namely facts that share the same subject as edited knowledge but differ in relation and object. This challenge arises because subject representations inherently encode multiple attributes, causing the target and fine-grained irrelevant knowledge to become entangled in the representation space, and thus vulnerable to unintended alterations during editing. To address this, we propose DiKE, a novel approach that Disentangles Knowledge representations for LLM Editing (DiKE). DiKE consists of two key components: a Knowledge Representation Disentanglement (KRD) module that decomposes the subject representation into target-knowledge-related and -unrelated components, and a Disentanglementbased Knowledge Edit (DKE) module that updates only the target-related component while explicitly preserving the unrelated one. We further derive a closedform, rank-one parameter update based on matrix theory to enable efficient and minimally invasive edits. To rigorously evaluate fine-grained irrelevant knowledge preservation, we construct FINE-KED, a new benchmark comprising fine-grained irrelevant knowledge at different levels of relational similarity to the edited knowledge. Extensive experiments across multiple LLMs demonstrate that DiKE substantially improves fine-grained irrelevant knowledge preservation while maintaining competitive general editing performance.

We investigate whether large language models (LLMs) can predict whether they will succeed on a given task and whether their predictions improve as they progress through multi-step tasks. We also investigate whether LLMs can learn from in-context experiences to make better decisions about whether to pursue a task in scenarios where failure is costly. All LLMs we tested are overconfident, but most predict their success with better-than-random discriminatory power. We find that newer and larger LLMs generally do not have greater discriminatory power, though Claude models do show such a trend. On multi-step agentic tasks, the overconfidence of several frontier LLMs worsens as they progress through the tasks, and reasoning LLMs perform comparably to or worse than non-reasoning LLMs. With in-context experiences of failure, some but not all LLMs reduce their overconfidence leading to significantly improved decision making, while others do not. Interestingly, all LLMs’ decisions are approximately rational given their estimated probabilities of success, yet their overly-optimistic estimates result in poor decision making. These results suggest that current LLM agents are hindered by their lack of awareness of their own capabilities. We discuss the implications of LLMs' awareness of their capabilities for AI misuse and misalignment risks.

Reinforcement learning (RL) has become a cornerstone for enhancing the reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs), with recent innovations such as Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO) demonstrating exceptional effectiveness. In this study, we identify a critical yet underexplored issue in RL training: low-probability tokens disproportionately influence model updates due to their large gradient magnitudes. This dominance hinders the effective learning of high-probability tokens, whose gradients are essential for LLMs' performance but are substantially suppressed. To mitigate this interference, we propose two novel methods: Advantage Reweighting and Low-Probability Token Isolation (Lopti), both of which effectively attenuate gradients from low-probability tokens while emphasizing parameter updates driven by high-probability tokens. Our approaches promote balanced updates across tokens with varying probabilities, thereby enhancing the efficiency of RL training. Experimental results demonstrate that they substantially improve the performance of GRPO-trained LLMs, achieving up to a 46.2% improvement in K&K Logic Puzzle reasoning tasks. Our implementation is available at https://github.com/zhyang2226/AR-Lopti.

Alignment training has tradeoffs: it helps language models (LMs) gain in reasoning and instruction following but might lose out on skills such as creativity and calibration, where unaligned base models are better at. We aim to make the best of both worlds through model collaboration, where different models in the training pipeline collaborate and complement each other. Since LM responses feature interleaving skills that favor different models, we propose Switch Generation, where pretrained and aligned model versions take turns to ``speak'' in a response sequence. Specifically, we train a switcher LM by learning from outcomes of choosing different models to generate the next segment across diverse queries and contexts. At inference time, the switcher LM guides different model checkpoints to dynamically generate the next segment where their strengths are most needed. Extensive experiments with 8 model collaboration baselines and 18 datasets show that 1) model collaboration consistently outperforms individual models on 16 out of 18 tasks, and 2) Switch Generation further outperforms baselines by 12.9% on average. Further analysis reveals that Switch Generation discovers compositional skills to solve problems where individual models struggle and generalizes to unseen models and tasks, reusing and repurposing by-products in expensive model training pipelines that are otherwise discarded.

We present DuPO, a dual learning-based preference optimization framework that generates annotation-free feedback via generalized duality. DuPO addresses two key limitations: Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR)’s reliance on costly labels and applicability restricted to verifiable tasks, and traditional dual learning’s restriction to strictly dual task pairs (e.g., translation and back-translation). Specifically, DuPO decomposes a primal task’s input into known and unknown components, then constructs its dual task to reconstruct the unknown part using the primal output and known information (e.g., reversing math solutions to recover hidden variables), broadening applicability to non-invertible tasks. The quality of this reconstruction serves as a self-supervised reward to optimize the primal task, synergizing with LLMs’ ability to instantiate both tasks via a single model. Empirically, DuPO achieves substantial gains across diverse tasks: it enhances the average translation quality by 2.1 COMET over 756 directions, boosts the mathematical reasoning accuracy by an average of 6.4 points on four challenge benchmarks, and enhances performance by 9.3 points as an inference-time reranker~(trading computation for accuracy). These results position DuPO as a scalable, general, and annotation-free paradigm for LLM optimization.

Reinforcement learning (RL) finetuning has become a key technique for enhancing the reasoning abilities of large language models (LLMs). However, its effectiveness critically depends on the selection of training data. Recent advances underscore the importance of online prompt selection methods, which typically concentrate training on partially solved or moderately challenging examples under the current policy, thereby yielding more effective model updates. While significantly accelerating RL finetuning in terms of training steps, they also incur substantial computational overhead by requiring extensive LLM rollouts over large candidate batches to identify informative samples, an expense that can outweigh the finetuning process itself. To address this challenge, this work proposes Dynamics-Predictive Sampling (DPS), which online predicts and selects informative prompts by inferring their learning dynamics prior to costly rollouts. Specifically, we introduce a new perspective by modeling each prompt's solving progress during RL finetuning as a dynamical system, where the extent of solving is represented as the state and the transition is characterized by a hidden Markov model. Using historical rollout reward signals, we perform online Bayesian inference to estimate evolving state distributions, and the inference outcome provides a predictive prior for efficient prompt selection without rollout-intensive filtering. Empirical results across diverse reasoning tasks, including mathematics, planning, and visual geometry, demonstrate that DPS substantially reduces redundant rollouts, accelerates the training process, and achieves superior reasoning performance.

Model editing techniques are essential for efficiently updating knowledge in large language models (LLMs). However, the effectiveness of existing approaches degrades in massive editing scenarios, particularly when evaluated with practical metrics. Their robustness is also limited in context-rich settings or when editing multiple facts of the same subject simultaneously. We attribute these failures to the embedding misalignment among knowledge items, which undermines editing reliability at scale. To address this, we propose EAMET (Embedding Alignment Model Editing in Transformers), which addresses this issue by aligning the space of key and residual embeddings. Extensive experiments across six LLMs and three datasets demonstrate that EAMET consistently outperforms existing methods, achieving about 90\% editing efficacy when editing 10k facts.

Balancing exploration and exploitation remains a central challenge in reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) for large language models (LLMs). Current RLVR methods often overemphasize exploitation, leading to entropy collapse, diminished exploratory capacity, and ultimately limited performance gains. Although techniques that increase policy stochasticity can promote exploration, they frequently fail to escape dominant behavioral modes. This creates a self-reinforcing loop—repeatedly sampling and rewarding dominant modes—that further erodes exploration. We introduce **E**xploration-**E**nhanced **P**olicy **O**ptimization (**EEPO**), a framework that promotes exploration via two-stage rollouts with adaptive unlearning. In the first stage, the model generates half of the trajectories; it then undergoes a lightweight unlearning step to temporarily suppress these sampled responses, forcing the second stage to explore different regions of the output space. This *sample-then-forget* mechanism disrupts the self-reinforcing loop and promotes wider exploration during rollouts. Across five reasoning benchmarks, EEPO outperforms GRPO, achieving average relative gains of 24.3\% on Qwen2.5-3B, 33.0\% on Llama3.2-3B-Instruct, and 10.4\% on Qwen3-8B-Base.

Prompt engineering has become central to eliciting the capabilities of large language models (LLMs). At its core lies prompt selection - efficiently identifying the most effective prompts. However, most prior investigations overlook a key challenge: the inherently multi-faceted nature of prompt performance, which cannot be captured by a single metric. To fill this gap, we study the multi-objective prompt selection problem under two practical settings: Pareto prompt set recovery and best feasible prompt identification. Casting the problem into the pure-exploration bandits framework, we adapt provably efficient algorithms from multi-objective bandits and further introduce a novel design for best feasible arm identification in structured bandits, with theoretical guarantees on the identification error in the linear case. Extensive experiments across multiple LLMs show that the bandit-based approaches yield significant improvements over baselines, establishing a principled and efficient framework for multi-objective prompt optimization.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have recently been successfully applied to regression tasks---such as time series forecasting and tabular prediction---by leveraging their in-context learning abilities. However, their autoregressive decoding process may be ill-suited to continuous-valued outputs, where obtaining predictive distributions over numerical targets requires repeated sampling, leading to high computational cost and inference time. In this work, we investigate whether distributional properties of LLM predictions can be recovered _without_ explicit autoregressive generation. To this end, we study a set of regression probes trained to predict statistical functionals (e.g., mean, median, quantiles) of the LLM’s numerical output distribution directly from its internal representations. Our results suggest that LLM embeddings carry informative signals about summary statistics of their predictive distributions, including the numerical uncertainty. This investigation opens up new questions about how LLMs internally encode uncertainty in numerical tasks, and about the feasibility of lightweight alternatives to sampling-based approaches for uncertainty-aware numerical predictions.

Large Language Models (LLMs), despite advances in instruction tuning, often fail to follow complex user instructions. Activation steering techniques aim to mitigate this by manipulating model internals, but have a potential risk of oversteering, where excessive emphasis on the instruction degrades task accuracy and overall text quality. To address this, we introduce DIRECTER (Dynamic rejection steering), a novel steering method that dynamically modulates steering strength by scaling the KV cache without extra dataset. DIRECTER couples steering with a plausibility-guided decoding loop, which adaptively adjusts steering strength at each step by comparing the steered output distribution to the original. If the steered output is deemed implausible, steering strength is progressively weakened. This strength modulation is guided by a lightweight, one-time attention sensitivity analysis that ranks layers by their influence on model representations. Extensive evaluations show that DIRECTER significantly enhances instruction-following capabilities across diverse benchmarks, improving accuracy by up to 6.5% over baselines without the common trade-offs in generation quality or task fidelity. The proposed dynamic, plausibility-guided control during activation steering further demonstrates its potential as a general mechanism for mitigating oversteering that is compatible with existing baselines.

Model merging plays a crucial role in consolidating multiple specialized models into a single, unified model, especially in the era of large language models (LLMs). Recent research has primarily focused on developing strategies to enhance merging performance with the trained models, while the impact of training paradigms, such as supervised fine-tuning (SFT) and reinforcement learning (RL), on the effectiveness of model merging remains underexplored. In this study, we systematically explore the merging behavior of RL-trained LLMs compared to those trained with traditional SFT. Through comprehensive evaluations across five representative tasks, we find that RL significantly reduces task conflicts and results in less performance degradation after merging, making RL-trained models particularly well-suited for this process. To unearth the reasons behind the superior suitability of RL for model merging, we conduct extensive empirical experiments and theoretical analyses. Our findings highlight three key factors: (1) On-policy training data in RL control the gradient updates in a smaller magnitude, reducing the risk of overwriting existing knowledge for other tasks in the model. (2) The RL optimization objective, which favors "\textit{enough is as good as a feast}", progressively reduces the magnitude of parameter updates as the model converges, thereby alleviating inter-task conflicts. (3) Joint optimization of positive and negative examples in RL steers the model towards an unbiased task-specific parameter subspace, ensuring robust performance while further preventing parameter conflicts.

Reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) with proximal policy optimization (PPO) is widely used but often yields less diverse outputs than supervised fine-tuning, suggesting an effect in which the policy’s support contracts during on-policy optimization. We formalize this “policy contraction” with the Support Retention Ratio (SRR)—the share of SFT completions that retain non-negligible probability under the RL policy—and additionally track token-entropy, Kullback–Leibler (KL) divergence to the reference, and repetition. We propose Contraction-Aware PPO (CaPPO), a minimum-norm multi-gradient update that co-optimizes reward, entropy, and KL, paired with a controller that steers exploration toward a target token entropy. On HH-RLHF, Summarize-from-Feedback, and UltraFeedback with Qwen2-7B, Qwen2.5-14B, Mistral-7B-Instruct, and Llama-3-8B-Instruct, CaPPO increases win rate by 2 to 4 points over PPO and improves diversity, gaining 0.2 to 0.3 higher SRR. The gains persist under decoding sweeps and are robust to reward scaling and critic variance. Treating reward, diversity, and stability as first-class objectives, CaPPO mitigates contraction without sacrificing alignment performance.

The possibility of LLM self-awareness and even sentience is gaining increasing public attention and has major safety and policy implications, but the science of measuring them is still in a nascent state. Here we introduce a novel methodology for quantitatively evaluating metacognitive abilities in LLMs. Taking inspiration from research on metacognition in nonhuman animals, our approach eschews model self-reports and instead tests to what degree models can strategically deploy knowledge of internal states. Using two experimental paradigms, we demonstrate that frontier LLMs introduced since early 2024 show increasingly strong evidence of certain metacognitive abilities, specifically the ability to assess and utilize their own confidence in their ability to answer factual and reasoning questions correctly and the ability to anticipate what answers they would give and utilize that information appropriately. We buttress these behavioral findings with an analysis of the token probabilities returned by the models, which suggests the presence of an upstream internal signal that could provide the basis for metacognition. We further find that these abilities 1) are limited in resolution, 2) emerge in context-dependent manners, and 3) seem to be qualitatively different from those of humans. We also report intriguing differences across models of similar capabilities, suggesting that LLM post-training may have a role in developing metacognitive abilities.

This paper examines the exploration–exploitation trade-off in reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR), a framework for improving the reasoning of Large Language Models (LLMs). Recent studies suggest that RLVR can elicit strong mathematical reasoning in LLMs through two seemingly paradoxical mechanisms: \textit{spurious rewards}, which suppress exploitation by rewarding outcomes unrelated to the ground truth, and \textit{entropy minimization}, which suppresses exploration by pushing the model toward more confident and deterministic outputs, highlighting a puzzling dynamic: both discouraging exploitation and discouraging exploration improve reasoning performance, yet the underlying principles that reconcile these effects remain poorly understood. We focus on two fundamental questions: (i) how policy entropy relates to performance, and (ii) whether spurious rewards yield gains, potentially through the interplay of clipping bias and model contamination. Our results show that clipping bias under spurious rewards reduces policy entropy, leading to more confident and deterministic outputs, while entropy minimization alone is insufficient for improvement. We further propose a reward-misalignment model explaining why spurious rewards can enhance performance beyond contaminated settings. Our findings clarify the mechanisms behind spurious-reward benefits and provide principles for more effective RLVR training.

Effective personalization of LLMs is critical for a broad range of user-interfacing applications such as virtual assistants and content curation. Inspired by the strong in-context capabilities of LLMs, we propose few-shot preference optimization (FSPO), an algorithm for LLM personalization that reframes reward modeling as a meta-learning problem. Under FSPO, an LLM learns to quickly infer a personalized reward function for a user via a few labeled preferences. FSPO also utilizes user description rationalization (RAT) to encourage better reward modeling and instruction following, recovering performance with the oracle user description. Since real-world preference data is challenging to collect at scale, we propose careful design choices to construct synthetic preference datasets for personalization, generating over 1M synthetic personalized preferences using publicly available LLMs. To successfully transfer from synthetic data to real users, we find it crucial for the data to exhibit both high diversity and coherent, self-consistent structure. We evaluate FSPO on personalized open-ended generation for up to 1,500 synthetic users across three domains: movie reviews, education, and open-ended question answering. We also run a controlled human study. Overall, FSPO achieves an 87% Alpaca Eval win-rate in generating responses that are personalized to synthetic users and a 70% win-rate with real human users in open-ended question answering.

The rapid rise of image generation calls for detection methods that are both interpretable and reliable. Existing approaches, though accurate, act as black boxes and fail to generalize to out-of-distribution data, while multi-modal large language models (MLLMs) provide reasoning ability but often hallucinate. To address these issues, we construct \textbf{FakeXplained} dataset of AI-generated images annotated with bounding boxes and descriptive captions that highlight synthesis artifacts, forming the basis for human-aligned, visually grounded reasoning. Leveraging \textbf{FakeXplained}, we develop \textbf{FakeXplainer} which fine-tunes MLLMs with a progressive training pipeline, enabling accurate detection, artifact localization, and coherent textual explanations. Extensive experiments show that \textbf{FakeXplainer} not only sets a new state-of-the-art in detection and localization accuracy ($98.2\%$ accuracy, $36.0\%$ IoU), but also demonstrates strong robustness and out-of-distribution generalization, uniquely delivering spatially grounded, human-aligned rationales. The code and dataset are available at: \href{https://github.com/Gennadiyev/FakeXplain}{https://github.com/Gennadiyev/FakeXplain}.

Activation steering has emerged as a cost-effective paradigm for modifying large language model (LLM) behaviors. Existing methods typically intervene at the block level, steering the bundled activations of selected attention heads, feedforward networks, or residual streams. However, we reveal that block-level activations are inherently heterogeneous, entangling beneficial, irrelevant, and harmful features, thereby rendering block-level steering coarse, inefficient, and intrusive. To investigate the root cause, we decompose block activations into fine-grained atomic unit (AU)–level activations, where each AU-level activation corresponds to a single dimension of the block activation, and each AU denotes a slice of the block weight matrix. Steering an AU-level activation is thus equivalent to steering its associated AU. Our theoretical and empirical analysis show that heterogeneity arises because different AUs or dimensions control distinct token distributions in LLM outputs. Hence, block-level steering inevitably moves helpful and harmful token directions together, which reduces efficiency. Restricting intervention to beneficial AUs yields more precise and effective steering. Building on this insight, we propose AUSteer, a simple and efficient method that operates at a finer granularity of the AU level. AUSteer first identifies discriminative AUs globally by computing activation momenta on contrastive samples. It then assigns adaptive steering strengths tailored to diverse inputs and selected AU activations. Comprehensive experiments on multiple LLMs and tasks show that AUSteer consistently surpasses advanced baselines while steering considerably fewer activations, demonstrating that steering less achieves more.

Conversations with LMs involve two participants: a human user leading the conversation, and an LM assistant responding to the user's request. To satisfy this specific role, LMs are post-trained to be helpful assistants -- optimized to produce exhaustive and well-structured responses, free of ambiguity and grammar errors. User utterances, on the other hand, are rarely perfected, with each user phrasing requests in unique ways, sometimes putting in partial effort at each turn and refining on the fly. To evaluate LM performance in realistic settings, prior work simulated users in multi-turn conversations, often by prompting an LM originally trained to be a helpful assistant to act as a user. However, we show that assistant LMs make for poor user simulators, with the surprising finding that better assistants yield worse simulators. Instead, we introduce purpose-built User Language Models (User LMs) - models post-trained to simulate human users in multi-turn conversations. Through various evaluations, we show how User LMs align better with human behavior and achieve better simulation robustness than existing simulation methods. When leveraging User LMs to simulate coding and math conversations, the performance of a strong assistant (GPT-4o) drops from 74.6% to 57.4%, confirming that more realistic simulation environments lead to assistant struggles as they fail to cope with the nuances of users in multi-turn setups.

We propose a post-training method for lower-resource languages that preserves the fluency of language models even when aligned by disfluent reward models. Preference optimization is now a well-researched topic, but previous work has mostly addressed models for English and Chinese. Lower-resource languages lack both datasets written by native speakers and instruction-tuned language models capable of generating fluent synthetic data. To address this, we focus on developing a fluent preference-aligned language model without any instruction-tuning data in the target language. Our approach uses an on-policy training method, which we compare with two common alternatives: supervised finetuning on machine-translated data and multilingual finetuning. We conduct a case study on Norwegian Bokmål and evaluate fluency through native-speaker assessments. The results show that the on-policy aspect is crucial and outperforms the alternatives without relying on any hard-to-obtain data.

Finetuning specialized generative evaluators has emerged as a popular paradigm to meet the increasing demand for scalable evaluation during both training and test-time. However, recent work has largely focused on applying new methodology, such as reinforcement learning (RL), to training evaluators, shying away from large-scale, data-driven development. In this work, we focus on data scaling, curating a set of 2.5M samples spanning five unique evaluation tasks (pairwise, step-level, reference-free and reference-based verification, and single rating) and multiple domains focused on reasoning evaluation. With our data, we train Foundational Automatic Reasoning Evaluators (FARE), a family of 8B and 20B (with 3.6B active) parameter evaluators, with a simple iterative rejection-sampling supervised finetuning (SFT) approach. FARE-8B challenges larger specialized RL-trained evaluators and FARE-20B sets the new standard for open-source evaluators, surpassing specialized 70B+ evaluators. Beyond static benchmarks, we evaluate FARE in real-world tasks: As inference-time rerankers, FARE-20B achieves near-oracle performance on MATH. As verifiers in RL training, FARE improves the downstream RL-trained model performance by up to 14.1\% vs. string-matching verifiers. When initialized from FARE, a continually-finetuned FARE-Code outperforms gpt-oss-20B by 65% on evaluating test-case quality

Does reinforcement learning (RL) teach large language models (LLMs) genuinely new skills, or does it merely activate existing ones? This question lies at the core of ongoing debates about the role of RL in LLM post-training. On one side, strong empirical results can be achieved with RL alone even without preceding supervised finetuning; on the other, critics argue that RL contributes little beyond reweighting existing reasoning strategies. This work provides concrete evidence that LLMs can acquire genuinely new skills during RL by composing existing ones, mirroring one of the central mechanisms by which humans acquire new cognitive skills \citep{Anderson1982Acquisition}. To mitigate data contamination and other confounding factors and to allow precise control over task complexity, we develop a synthetic framework for our investigation. Specifically, we define a skill as the ability to infer the output of a string transformation function $f(x)$ given $x$. Once an LLM has already learned $f$ and $g$ prior to RL, our experiments reveal that RL enables it to learn unseen compositions of them $h(x)=g(f(x))$. Further, this compositional ability generalizes to more difficult problems such as compositions of $>2$ functions unseen during training. Our experiments provide surprising evidence that this compositional ability, acquired on the source task, transfers to a different target task. This transfer occurs even though the model has never trained with RL on any compositional problems in the target task, as long as it has acquired the target task's atomic skills prior to RL on the source task. Our qualitative analysis shows that RL fundamentally changes the reasoning behaviors of the models. In contrast, neither of the findings is observed in next-token prediction training with the same data. Our systematic experiments provide fresh insights into the learning behaviors of widely-used post-training approaches for LLMs. They suggest the value of building base models with the necessary basic skills, followed by RL with appropriate incentivization to acquire more advanced skills that generalize better to complex and out-of-domain problems.

Reinforcement Learning (RL) can directly enhance the reasoning capabilities of large language models without extensive reliance on Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT). In this work, we revisit the traditional Policy Gradient (PG) mechanism and propose a minimalist RL approach termed Group Policy Gradient (GPG). Unlike conventional methods, GPG directly optimizes the original RL objective, thus obviating the need for surrogate loss functions. By eliminating the critic and reference models, avoiding KL divergence constraints, and addressing the advantage and gradient estimation bias, our approach significantly simplifies the training process compared to Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO). Our approach achieves superior performance without relying on auxiliary techniques or adjustments. As illustrated in Figure 1, extensive experiments demonstrate that our method not only reduces computational costs but also consistently outperforms GRPO across various unimodal and multimodal tasks.

Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) has emerged as a promising paradigm for post-training large language models (LLMs) on complex reasoning tasks. Yet, the conditions under which RLVR yields robust generalization remain underexplored. This paper provides an empirical study of RLVR generalization in the setting of probabilistic inference over causal graphical models. This setting offers two natural axes along which to examine generalization: (i) the level of the probabilistic query---associational, interventional, or counterfactual---and (ii) the structural complexity of the query, measured by the size of its relevant subgraph. We construct a dataset of causal graphs and queries spanning these difficulty axes and fine-tune Qwen-2.5-Instruct models using RLVR or supervised fine-tuning (SFT). We vary both the model scale (3B-32B) and the query level included in training. We find that RLVR yields stronger within-level and across-level generalization than SFT, but only for specific combinations of model size and training query level. Further analysis shows that RLVR's effectiveness depends on the model's initial reasoning competence. With sufficient initial competence, RLVR improves an LLM's marginalization strategy and reduces errors in intermediate probability calculations, producing substantial accuracy gains, particularly on more complex queries. These results show that RLVR can improve specific causal reasoning subskills, with its benefits emerging only when the model has sufficient initial competence. Our code and data is available at https://github.com/zhichul/rlcausal.

Reinforcement learning (RL) has emerged as a powerful post-training paradigm for large language models (LLMs), yet its effectiveness varies significantly across base models. While incorporating a pre-RL supervised fine-tuning (SFT) phase can enhance RL training, key questions remain: how long should the SFT cold-start phase last, and is the SFT objective truly aligned with the requirements for effective RL preparation? In our analysis of cold-start dynamics, we uncover a key limitation: the SFT checkpoint with the highest evaluation performance often fails to maximize RL potential due to distributional forgetting—a phenomenon where the model drifts excessively away from the base model’s distribution even before traditional overfitting occurs. We identify diversity metrics, such as the entropy and self-BLEU, as more reliable early-stopping criteria than the standard performance-based checkpoint selection. Our findings show that SFT checkpoints with peak diversity consistently lead to superior post-RL results. Building on these insights, we introduce Adaptive Early-Stop Loss (AESL), a lightweight and dynamic cold-start method that balances the acquisition of new patterns with the preservation of the base model's distribution. AESL operates at both the token and subsequence levels, providing finer-grained control over the cold-start process. Experimental results on mathematical reasoning benchmarks demonstrate that diversity-based early stopping surpasses traditional performance-based SFT, while AESL further enhances RL preparation. By steering LLMs toward better initialization points for RL, AESL consistently achieves superior final performance compared to existing SFT and cold-start strategies. The code is publicly available at \url{https://github.com/LXXXXR/AESL}.

Off-policy reinforcement learning (RL) for large language models (LLMs) is attracting growing interest, driven by practical constraints in real-world applications, the complexity of LLM-RL infrastructure, and the need for further innovations of RL methodologies. While classic REINFORCE and its modern variants like Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO) are typically regarded as on-policy algorithms with limited tolerance of off-policyness, we present in this work a first-principles derivation for group-relative REINFORCE — a REINFORCE variant that uses the within-group mean reward as the baseline for advantage calculation — without assuming a specific training data distribution, showing that it admits a native off-policy interpretation. This perspective yields two general principles for adapting REINFORCE to truly off-policy settings: regularizing policy updates, and actively shaping the data distribution. Our analysis demystifies some myths about the roles of importance sampling and clipping in GRPO, unifies and reinterprets two recent algorithms — Online Policy Mirror Descent and Asymmetric REINFORCE — as regularized forms of the REINFORCE loss, and offers theoretical justification for seemingly heuristic data-weighting strategies. Our findings lead to actionable insights that are validated with extensive empirical studies, and open up new opportunities for principled algorithm design in off-policy RL for LLMs. Source code for this work is available at https://github.com/agentscope-ai/Trinity-RFT/tree/main/examples/rec_gsm8k.

The reliability of Large Language Models (LLMs) in high-stakes domains such as healthcare, law, and scientific discovery is often compromised by hallucinations. These failures typically stem from two sources: *data-driven hallucinations* and *reasoning-driven hallucinations*. However, existing detection methods usually address only one source and rely on task-specific heuristics, limiting their generalization to complex scenarios. To overcome these limitations, we introduce the *Hallucination Risk Bound*, a unified theoretical framework that formally decomposes hallucination risk into data-driven and reasoning-driven components, linked respectively to training-time mismatches and inference-time instabilities. This provides a principled foundation for analyzing how hallucinations emerge and evolve. Building on this foundation, we introduce **HalluGuard**, an NTK-based score that leverages the induced geometry and captured representations of the NTK to jointly identify data-driven and reasoning-driven hallucinations. We evaluate **HalluGuard** on 10 diverse benchmarks, 11 competitive baselines, and 9 popular LLM backbones, consistently achieving state-of-the-art performance in detecting diverse forms of LLM hallucinations. We open-source our proposed \model{} model at https://github.com/Susan571/HalluGuard-ICLR2026.

Large Language Models (LLMs) currently respond to every prompt. However, they can produce incorrect answers when they lack knowledge or capability -- a problem known as hallucination. We instead propose post-training an LLM to generate content only when confident in its correctness and to otherwise (partially) abstain. Specifically, our method, HALT, produces capability-aligned post-training data that encodes what the model can and cannot reliably generate. We generate this data by splitting responses of the pretrained LLM into factual fragments (atomic statements or reasoning steps), and use ground truth information to identify incorrect fragments. We achieve capability-aligned finetuning responses by either removing incorrect fragments or replacing them with "Unsure from Here" -- according to a tunable threshold that allows practitioners to trade off response completeness and mean correctness of the response's fragments. We finetune four open-source models for biography writing, mathematics, coding, and medicine with HALT for three different trade-off thresholds. HALT effectively trades off response completeness for correctness, increasing the mean correctness of response fragments by 15% on average, while resulting in a 4% improvement in the F1 score (mean of completeness and correctness of the response) compared to the relevant baselines. By tuning HALT for highest correctness, we train a single reliable Llama3-70B model with correctness increased from 51% to 87% across all four domains while maintaining 53% of the response completeness achieved with standard finetuning.

Fine-tuning large pretrained language models is a common approach for aligning them with human preferences, but noisy or off-target examples can dilute supervision. While small, well-chosen datasets often match the performance of much larger ones, systematic and efficient ways to identify high-value training data remain underexplored. Many current methods rely on heuristics or expensive retraining. We present a principled, resource-efficient framework for data selection and reweighting. At its core is an In-Context Approximation (ICA) that estimates the holdout loss a model would incur after training on a candidate example by conditioning on a small, curated holdout set in context. ICA requires no reference model and no additional finetuning. We define the resulting estimate as the ICA score, and derive per-example weights that dynamically reweight gradient updates as model parameters evolve. Across SFT, DPO, and SimPO, and over diverse backbones and datasets, ICA-based reweighting consistently improves model alignment with minimal overhead. We analyze sensitivity to score update frequency and the number of in-context holdout examples. We also discuss limitations in rapidly drifting on-policy settings, highlighting directions for future work.

Unsupervised reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (URLVR) offers a pathway to scale LLM training beyond the supervision bottleneck by deriving rewards without ground truth labels. Recent works leverage model intrinsic signals, showing promising early gains, yet their potential and limitations remain unclear. In this work, we revisit URLVR and provide a comprehensive analysis spanning taxonomy, theory and extensive experiments. We first classify URLVR methods into intrinsic versus external based on reward sources, then establish a unified theoretical framework revealing that all intrinsic methods converge toward sharpening the model's initial distribution This sharpening mechanism succeeds when initial confidence aligns with correctness but fails catastrophically when misaligned. Through systematic experiments, we show intrinsic rewards consistently follow a rise-then-fall pattern across methods, with collapse timing determined by model prior rather than engineering choices. Despite these scaling limits, we find intrinsic rewards remain valuable in test-time training on small datasets, and propose Model Collapse Step to measure model prior, serving as a practical indicator for RL trainability. Finally, we explore external reward methods that ground verification in computational asymmetries, showing preliminary evidence they may escape the confidence-correctness ceiling. Our findings chart boundaries for intrinsic URLVR while motivating paths toward scalable alternatives. Code is available at \url{https://github.com/PRIME-RL/TTRL}.

Post-training for reasoning in large language models has increasingly relied on verifiable rewards: deterministic checkers that provide $0$–$1$ correctness signals. While reliable, such binary feedback is brittle—many tasks admit partially correct or alternative answers that verifiers under-credit, and the resulting all-or-nothing supervision limits learning. Reward models offer richer, continuous feedback, which can serve as a complementary supervisory signal to verifiers. We introduce HERO (Hybrid Ensemble Reward Optimization), a reinforcement learning framework that integrates sparse verifier signals with dense reward model scores in a structured way. HERO employs stratified normalization to bound reward-model scores within verifier-defined groups, preserving correctness while refining quality distinctions, and variance-aware weighting to emphasize challenging prompts where dense signals matter most. Across diverse mathematical reasoning benchmarks, HERO consistently outperforms reward model-only and verifier-only baselines, with strong gains on both verifiable and hard-to-verify tasks. Our results show that hybrid reward design retains the stability of verifiers while leveraging the nuance of reward models to advance reasoning.

Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT) is used to specialize model behavior by training weights to produce intended target responses for queries. In contrast, In-Context Learning (ICL) adapts models during inference with instructions or demonstrations in the prompt. ICL can offer better generalizability and more calibrated responses compared to SFT in data scarce settings, at the cost of more inference compute. In this work, we ask the question: \textit{Can ICL's internal computations be used to improve the qualities of SFT?} We first show that ICL and SFT produce distinct activation patterns, indicating that the two methods achieve adaptation through different functional mechanisms. Motivated by this observation and to use ICL's rich functionality, we introduce \textbf{I}CL \textbf{A}ctivation \textbf{A}lignment (\act), a self-distillation technique which aims to replicate ICL's activation patterns in SFT models and incentivizes ICL-like internal reasoning. Performing \act as a priming step before SFT significantly improves the accuracy and calibration of model outputs, as shown by our extensive empirical results on 12 popular benchmarks and two model families. This finding is not only practically useful, but also offers a conceptual window into the inner mechanics of model adaptation.

Supervised fine-tuning (SFT) relies critically on selecting training data that most benefits model's downstream performance. Gradient-based data selection methods such as TracIn and Influence Functions leverage influence to identify useful samples, but their computational cost scales poorly, making them impractical for multi-billion-parameter large language models (LLMs). A common alternative is to use off-the-shelf smaller models as proxies, but they remain suboptimal since their learning dynamics are unclear, their sizes cannot be flexibly adjusted, and they cannot be further aligned with the target model in terms of gradient-based influence estimation. To address these challenges, we introduce IProX, a two-stage framework that derives influence-preserving proxies directly from the target model. It first applies a low-rank compression stage to preserve influence information of the target model, and then an aligning stage to align both model gradients and logits, thereby constructing proxies that flexibly control computational cost while retaining the target model’s influence. Experimental results across diverse LLM families and evaluation tasks show that IProX consistently outperforms off-the-shelf proxies and baseline methods. On Qwen3-4B, a 1.5B proxy constructed with IProX achieves stronger performance than the larger 1.7B off-the-shelf proxy. Notably, on Llama3.2, IProX achieves better performance than baselines while reducing computational cost by more than half relative to the full 3B model. These results show that IProX provides effective influence-preserving proxies, making gradient-based data selection more scalable for LLMs.

Masked diffusion large language models (dLLMs) are emerging as promising alternatives to autoregressive LLMs, offering competitive performance while supporting unique generation capabilities such as inpainting. We explore how inpainting can inform RL algorithm design for dLLMs. Aligning LLMs with reinforcement learning faces an exploration challenge: sparse reward signals and sample waste when models fail to discover correct solutions. While this inefficiency affects LLMs broadly, dLLMs offer a distinctive opportunity—their inpainting ability can guide exploration. We introduce IGPO (Inpainting Guided Policy Optimization), an RL framework that strategically inserts partial ground-truth reasoning traces during online sampling. Unlike providing full solutions, inpainting steers exploration toward promising trajectory spaces while preserving self-generated reasoning, bridging supervised fine-tuning and reinforcement learning. We apply IGPO to group-based optimization methods such as GRPO, where exploration failures cause zero advantages and gradients. IGPO restores meaningful gradients while improving sample efficiency. We also propose supervised fine-tuning on synthetically rewritten concise traces that better align with dLLM generation patterns. With additional techniques including entropy-based filtering, our training recipe yields substantial gains across four mathematical benchmarks—GSM8K, Math500, AMC and Minerva—achieving new state-of-the-art results for full-attention masked dLLMs.

The progress of AI is bottlenecked by the quality of evaluation, making powerful LLM-as-a-Judge models a core solution. The efficacy of these judges depends on their chain-of-thought reasoning, creating a critical need for methods that can effectively optimize this reasoning process. In this work, we introduce J1, a reinforcement learning framework for teaching LLM judges to think before making decisions. Our core contribution lies in converting all judgment tasks for nonverifiable and verifiable prompts into a unified format with verifiable rewards, enabling direct optimization of evaluation quality while mitigating positional bias. We then use RL to train thinking-judges at scales of 8B, 32B, and 70B and show that they obtain state-of-the-art performance across multiple benchmarks. In particular, J1-Qwen-32B, our multitasked pointwise and pairwise judge also outperforms o1-mini, o3, and a much larger 671B DeepSeek-R1 on some benchmarks, while only training on synthetic data. Through comprehensive ablations of pairwise, pointwise, and multitask J1 variants, we demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach across seed prompts, reward strategies, and training recipes. Qualitative analysis reveals that J1 develops systematic evaluation strategies, including dynamic criteria generation, reference answer creation, iterative self-correction of initial assessments, and feedback generation for low-quality responses.

Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) has emerged as a powerful framework for aligning large language models (LLMs) with human preferences via pairwise comparisons. However, its performance is highly sensitive to the quality of training samples: when the reference policy is poorly aligned with human preferences, ambiguous pairs can dominate the gradient signal and degrade generalization. To address this, we propose RAPPO($\textbf{R}$eliable $\textbf{A}$lignment for $\textbf{P}$reference $\textbf{P}$olicy $\textbf{O}$ptimization), a simple sample-aware modification of the DPO loss that mitigates reference-policy misalignment by filtering out the hardest, most ambiguous samples. We theoretically show that RAPPO yields improved generalization guarantees. RAPPO is lightweight and requires only a few lines of code to be integrated into any existing DPO-type algorithm. Surprisingly, With this simple modification, our simulations across a broad suite of alignment tasks and benchmarks show consistent gains over DPO and recent state-of-the-art baselines. On the PKU-SafeRLHF benchmark, RAPPO attains helpfulness $0.693$ ($+34.8\%$ over DPO) and harmlessness $0.357$ ($-21.0\%$ vs DPO).

Knowledge editing and machine unlearning are two popular approaches for large language models (LLMs) to stay up-to-date. However, the knowledge updating mechanism of LLMs remains largely unexplored due to insufficient, isolated, and small-scale evaluation. For instance, are LLMs similar to humans in modifying certain knowledge? What differs editing and unlearning as training data increases? This paper proposes KnowledgeSmith, a unified framework to systematically understand the updating mechanism of LLMs. We first cast editing and unlearning as instances of one constrained optimization problem. Then, we propose an automatic dataset generator that provides structured interventions across multiple graph levels and data scales, enabling controlled studies of how different modification strategies propagate through model knowledge. Extensive experiments demonstrate nuanced insights over knowledge propagation, plasticity scaling, consistency, and robustness. For instance, our results show that LLMs do not exhibit similar updating as humans for different levels of knowledge, and there exists consistency-capacity trade-off. We hope our findings can offer suggestions to the design of more reliable and scalable strategies. Code: https://github.com/AIFrontierLab/KnowledgeSmith

The success of LLMs has sparked interest in various agentic applications. A key hypothesis is that LLMs, leveraging common sense and Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning, can effectively explore and efficiently solve complex domains. However, LLM agents have been found to suffer from sub-optimal exploration and the knowing-doing gap, the inability to effectively act on knowledge present in the model. In this work, we systematically study why LLMs perform sub-optimally in decision-making scenarios. In particular, we closely examine three prevalent failure modes: greediness, frequency bias, and the knowing-doing gap. We propose mitigation of these shortcomings by fine-tuning via Reinforcement Learning (RL) on self-generated CoT rationales. Our experiments across multi-armed bandits, contextual bandits, and Tic-tac-toe demonstrate that RL fine-tuning enhances the decision-making abilities of LLMs by increasing exploration and narrowing the knowing-doing gap. Finally, we study both classic exploration mechanisms, such as $\epsilon$-greedy, and LLM-specific approaches, such as self-correction and self-consistency, to enable more effective fine-tuning of LLMs for decision-making.

Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) has recently emerged as a core paradigm for enhancing the reasoning capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs). To address the lack of verification signals at test time after RLVR, prior studies incorporate the training of model's self-verification capabilities into the standard RLVR process, thereby unifying reasoning and verification capabilities within a single LLM. However, previous practice requires the LLM to sequentially generate solutions and self-verifications using two separate prompt templates, which doubles the inference cost per sample and significantly reduces efficiency. In this work, we theoretically reveal that the closed-form solution to the RL objective of self-verification training can be approximately reduced to a remarkably simple form: the true reasoning reward of a solution is equal to its last-token self-rewarding score, which is computed as the difference between the policy model's next-token log-probability assigned to any pre-specified token at the solution's last token and a pre-calculated constant, scaled by the KL coefficient. Based on this insight, we propose LaSeR (Reinforcement Learning with Last-Token Self-Rewarding), an algorithm that simply augments the original RLVR loss with a Mean Squared Error (MSE) loss that aligns the last-token self-rewarding scores with the verifier-based reasoning rewards, and jointly optimizes the reasoning and self-rewarding capabilities of LLMs. The optimized self-rewarding scores serve as auxiliary reward signals in both training and testing to enhance model performance. Notably, our algorithm derives these scores from the predicted next-token probability distribution of the last solution token immediately after solution generation, thereby incurring only the minimal extra cost of at most one additional token inference. Experimental results show that our method not only improves the reasoning performance of the model also equips it with remarkable self-rewarding capability, thereby further boosting its inference-time scaling performance.

Machine-generated text (MGT) detection is critical for safeguarding online content integrity and preventing the spread of misleading information. Although existing detectors achieve high accuracy in monolingual settings, they exhibit severe performance degradation on zero-shot languages and are vulnerable to adversarial attacks. To tackle these challenges, we propose a robust adversarial training framework named **T**ranslation-based **A**ttacker **S**trengthens Mul**T**ilingual Def**E**nder (TASTE). TASTE comprises two core components: an attacker that performs code-switching by querying translation dictionaries to generate adversarial examples, and a detector trained to resist these attacks while generalizing to unseen languages. We further introduce a novel Language-Agnostic Adversarial Loss (LAAL), which encourages the detector to learn language-invariant feature representations and thus enhances zero-shot detection performance and robustness against unseen attacks. Additionally, the attacker and detector are synchronously updated, enabling continuous improvement of defensive capabilities. Experimental results on 9 languages and 8 attack types show that our TASTE surpasses 8 SOTA detectors, improving the average F1 score by **0.064** and reducing the average Attack Success Rate (ASR) by **3.8\%**. Our framework offers a promising approach for building robust, multilingual MGT detectors with strong generalization to real-world adversarial scenarios. Our codes are available in https://github.com/Liyuuuu111/MGT-Eval, and our datasets and pretrained checkpoint are available in https://drive.google.com/file/d/1w1hbdiZMS_JzPntVMWM3qrTQ4KxJf-t6.

Reward models are crucial for aligning large language models (LLMs) with human values and intentions. Existing approaches follow either Generative (GRMs) or Discriminative (DRMs) paradigms, yet both suffer from limitations: GRMs typically demand costly point-wise supervision, while DRMs produce uncalibrated relative scores that lack probabilistic interpretation. To address these challenges, we introduce a novel reward modeling paradigm: Probabilistic Reward Model (PRM). Instead of modeling reward as a deterministic scalar, our approach treats it as a random variable, learning a full probability distribution for the quality of each response. To make this paradigm practical, we present its closed-form, discrete realization: the **Ordinal Probabilistic Reward Model** (OPRM), which discretizes the quality score into a finite set of ordinal ratings. Building on OPRM, we propose a data-efficient training strategy called **Region Flooding Tuning** (RgFT). It enables rewards to better reflect absolute text quality by incorporating quality-level annotations, which guide the model to concentrate the probability mass within corresponding rating sub-regions. Experiments on various reward model benchmarks show that our method improves accuracy by **2.9% ～ 7.4%** compared to prior reward models, demonstrating strong performance and data efficiency. Analysis of the score distribution provides evidence that our method captures not only relative rankings but also absolute quality.

Recent advances in large language model (LLM) reasoning have shown that reasoning ability can emerge through reinforcement learning (RL). However, despite these successes, RL in its current form remains insufficient to induce capabilities that exceed the limitations of the base model, as it is primarily optimized based on existing knowledge of the model. To address this limitation, we employ supervised fine-tuning (SFT) to learn what RL cannot, which enables the incorporation of new knowledge and reasoning patterns by leveraging high-quality demonstration data. We analyze the training dynamics of RL and SFT for LLM reasoning and find that RL excels at improving performance on questions within the model's original capabilities, while SFT is more effective at enabling progress on questions beyond the current scope of the model. Motivated by the complementary strengths of RL and SFT, we introduce \textbf{ReLIFT} (\textbf{Re}inforcement \textbf{L}earning \textbf{I}nterleaved with Online \textbf{F}ine-\textbf{T}uning), a novel training strategy. ReLIFT employs RL for general training, but interleaves it with targeted SFT on challenging questions for which high-quality solutions are collected online. By alternating between RL and SFT, ReLIFT addresses model weaknesses as they emerge. Empirically, ReLIFT outperforms previous RLVR methods by an average of +6.7 points across a suite of six benchmarks (five math reasoning and one out-of-distribution). More importantly, ReLIFT surpasses baselines such as individual RL, individual SFT, and various hybrid approaches while reducing the required training time. These results provide compelling evidence that ReLIFT is a powerful and resource-efficient paradigm for developing capable reasoning models. The code is available at \href{https://github.com/TheRoadQaQ/ReLIFT}{here}.

Unit testing is a core practice in programming, enabling systematic evaluation of programs produced by human developers or large language models (LLMs). Given the challenges in writing comprehensive unit tests, LLMs have been employed to automate unit test generation, yet methods for training LLMs to produce high-quality unit tests remain underexplored. In this work, we propose UTRL, a novel reinforcement learning (RL) framework that trains an LLM to generate high-quality unit test given a programming instruction. Our key idea is to iteratively train two LLMs, the unit test generator and the code generator, in an adversarial manner via RL: (1) the unit test generator is trained to maximize a discrimination reward, encouraging it to produce tests that reveal faults in the code generator’s solutions; and (2) the code generator is trained to maximize a code reward, encouraging it to produce solutions that pass the unit tests generated by the unit test generator. In our experiment, we demonstrate that unit tests generated by Qwen3-4B trained via UTRL show higher quality compared to unit tests generated by the same model trained via supervised fine-tuning on ground-truth unit tests, yielding code evaluations that more closely align with those induced by the ground-truth tests. Moreover, Qwen3-4B trained with UTRL outperforms frontier models like GPT-4.1 and GPT-4o in generating high-quality unit tests, highlighting the effectiveness of UTRL in training LLMs for the unit test generation.

Large language models excel with reinforcement learning (RL), but fully unlocking this potential requires a mid-training stage. Intuitively, an effective mid-training stage should both learn a strong policy prior and enable fast learning through online interactions. We formalize this intuition by presenting the first theoretical result on how mid-training shapes post-training: it acquires strong policy priors by efficiently pruning the action space and accelerates RL convergence by shortening the effective planning horizon. Moreover, we prove that temporal abstractions simultaneously compress the size of the action set and reduce the decision horizon, thereby improving regret minimization after training. Building on these insights, we introduce Reasoning as Action Abstractions (RA3), a scalable mid-training algorithm. Specifically, we derive a temporal variational bound and optimize it by iteratively discovering temporally-consistent latent structures via RL, then fine-tuning on the bootstrapped data. Experiments on code generation tasks demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach. Across multiple base models, RA3 improves the average performance on HumanEval and MBPP by 8 and 4 points over the base model and the next-token prediction baseline. Furthermore, RA3 achieves faster convergence and higher asymptotic performance in RLVR on HumanEval+, MBPP+, LiveCodeBench, and Codeforces.

As everyday use cases of large language model (LLM) AI assistants have expanded, it is becoming increasingly important to personalize responses to align to different users' preferences and goals. While reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) is effective at improving LLMs to be generally more helpful and fluent, it does not account for variability across users, as it models the entire user population with a single reward model, meaning it assumes that everyone's preferences are the same. We present a novel framework, **P**reference **L**earning **U**sing **S**ummarization (**PLUS**), that uses reinforcement learning (RL) to learn to produce text-based summaries of each user's preferences, characteristics, and past conversations. These summaries condition the reward model, enabling it to make personalized predictions about the types of responses valued by each user. Both the user-summarization model and reward model are trained simultaneously, creating an online co-adaptation loop. We show that in contrast to the standard Bradley–Terry model, summaries produced by PLUS capture diverse aspects of user preferences, achieving a 11–77\% improvement in reward model accuracy. Key strengths of PLUS are: (1) robust performance with new users and conversation topics, achieving a 25\% improvement over the best personalized reward model technique used for RLHF; (2) zero-shot personalization with state-of-the-art proprietary models like GPT-4 (e.g., PLUS-summary-conditioned responses achieved a 72\% win rate compared to 28\% for default GPT-4o); (3) learning from flexible user contexts beyond preference labels, and (4) interpretable representation of users, enabling greater transparency and user control in pluralistic LLM alignment.

Ensuring native-like quality of large language model (LLM) responses across many languages is challenging. To address this, we introduce MENLO, a framework that operationalizes the evaluation of native-like response quality based on audience design-inspired mechanisms. Using MENLO, we create a dataset of 6,423 human-annotated prompt–response preference pairs covering four quality dimensions with high inter-annotator agreement in 47 language varieties. Our evaluation reveals that zero-shot LLM judges benefit significantly from pairwise evaluation and our structured annotation rubrics, yet they still underperform human annotators on our dataset. We demonstrate substantial improvements through fine-tuning with reinforcement learning, reward shaping, and multi-task learning approaches. Additionally, we show that RL-trained judges can serve as generative reward models to enhance LLMs' multilingual proficiency, though discrepancies with human judgment remain. Our findings suggest promising directions for scalable multilingual evaluation and preference alignment. We release our dataset and evaluation framework to support further research in multilingual LLM evaluation (https://huggingface.co/datasets/facebook/menlo).

Obtaining high-quality generations in modern LLMs has largely been framed as a selection problem: identifying a single winning generation from a diverse pool of $N$ samples, the Best-of-$N$ (BoN). Yet, this approach is inherently zero-sum, discarding diverse and potentially useful information from the pool. Instead, we explore a collaborative setup, where all candidates can potentially contribute to the final winning generation. To this end, we propose Fusion-of-$N$ (FusioN): a method that uses a general LLM judge to synthesize the most informative elements of each sample into a single final answer. We compare FusioN to BoN in two settings, (i) test-time scaling, where we sample and aggregate from a single model at test-time (ii) synthetic data generation, where we fuse samples from a pool of diverse teachers to improve a student model. We extensively benchmark both setups across 11 languages, 3 diverse benchmarks and varying model scales. Across the bench, FusionN consistently outperforms BoN showing versatility and robustness both in test-time scaling and in downstream gains from synthetic data generation. We also perform extensive analysis on FusioN, where it shows surprising strengths and robustness under challenging settings. These results show that we should shift how we think about evaluating and utilizing LLM generations from a monolithic measure of quality, to embracing their polylithic nature. This shift allows us to integrate diverse strengths, unlock latent potential, and achieve improvements that were previously inaccessible through selection alone.

Vision-language alignment in multi-modal large language models (MLLMs) relies on supervised fine-tuning (SFT) or reinforcement learning (RL). To align multi-modal large language models (MLLMs) in the post-training stage, supervised fine-tuning (SFT) is a stable choice but requires human annotations and lacks task generalizations, while Reinforcement Learning (RL) searches for better answers from reward signals but suffers from computational overhead and instability. To achieve balance among scalability, efficiency, and alignment generalizations, we propose MergeMix, a unified paradigm that bridges SFT and RL with an efficient Token Merge based Mixup augmentation. As for the Mixup policy, we generate contextual aligned mixed images with the corresponding labels according to the merged attention maps with cluster regions. Then, we enhance the preference-driven paradigm for MLLMs by building preference pairs with raw images and MergeMix-generated ones and optimizing the soft preference margin with the mixed SimPO loss. Extensive experiments demonstrate that MergeMix not only achieves dominant classification accuracy as an augmentation method but also improves generalization abilities and alignment of MLLMs, providing a new learning paradigm for preference alignment with training efficiency and stability.

In language tasks requiring extensive human-model interaction, the inference cost of large language models (LLMs) can be substantial. To reduce expenses while preserving the quality of the responses, an LLM router selects among candidate models to balance between the expected response quality and the inference cost. A central challenge in router training is the accuracy and accessibility of reliable supervision. Gold-standard data, obtained from domain experts or benchmark labels, provide accurate quality evaluations of LLM responses but are costly and difficult to scale. In contrast, preference-based data, collected via crowdsourcing or LLM-as-a-judge systems, are cheaper and more scalable, yet often biased in reflecting the true quality of responses. We cast the problem of LLM router training with combined Gold-standard and preference-based data into a causal inference framework by viewing the response evaluation mechanism as the treatment assignment. This perspective further reveals that the bias in preference-based data corresponds to the well-known causal estimand: the conditional average treatment effect (CATE). Based on this new perspective, we develop an integrative causal router training framework that corrects preference-data bias, addresses imbalances between two data sources, and improves routing robustness and efficiency. Numerical experiments demonstrate that our approach delivers more accurate routing and improves the trade-off between cost and quality. Illustrative code to reproduce our main experiment is available at https://github.com/yichistat/Meta-router.

Large language models are increasingly deployed in settings where newtasks arrive continuously, yet existing parameter-efficient finetuning (PEFT) methods either bloat linearly with the task horizon or sacrifice deep adaptation, leaving catastrophic forgetting unresolved. We aim to achieve memory-constant, on-the-fly adaptation for a frozen LLM facing an unbounded stream of tasks. To this end we propose Meta-Unified Contrastive Finetuning(Meta-UCF), which encodes each task into a lightweight layer-normalised mean embedding and feeds it to a single hypernetwork that instantly generates rank-r LoRA updates for every transformer layer; a meta-contrastive coupled with orthogonality objective further steers task embeddings into near-orthogonal directions, preserving past knowledge without inner-loop gradients. On four benchmark streams—Std-CL 5, Seq-GLUE 7, Long-CL 15 and TRACE-8—Meta-UCF raises average accuracy by up to 2.2 pp and cuts forgetting by 13% relative to the strongest LoRA baseline, while using the parameters of a single adapter. By decoupling continual learning from parameter growth, Meta-UCF provides a practical path toward scalable, low-resource lifelong language modelling.

Vision–Language–Action (VLA) models show promise in embodied reasoning, yet remain far from true generalists—they often require task-specific fine-tuning, incur high compute costs, and generalize poorly to unseen tasks. We propose MetaVLA, a unified, backbone-agnostic post-training framework for efficient and scalable alignment. MetaVLA introduces Context-Aware Meta Co-Training, which consolidates diverse target tasks into a single fine-tuning stage while leveraging structurally diverse auxiliary tasks to improve in-domain generalization. Unlike naive multi-task SFT, MetaVLA integrates a lightweight meta-learning mechanism—derived from Attentive Neural Processes—to enable rapid adaptation from diverse contexts with minimal architectural change or inference overhead. On the LIBERO benchmark, MetaVLA with six auxiliary tasks outperforms OpenVLA by up to 8.0\% on long-horizon tasks, reduces training steps from 240K to 75K, and cuts GPU time by 76%. These results show that scalable, low-resource post-training is achievable—paving the way toward general-purpose embodied agents. Code will be available.

The dominant paradigm for training large reasoning models—combining Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT) with Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR)—is fundamentally constrained by its reliance on high-quality, human-annotated reasoning data and external verifiers. This dependency incurs significant data-collection costs, risks embedding human cognitive biases, and confines the reinforcement learning stage to objectively assessable domains like mathematics and coding, leaving a vast landscape of unverifiable tasks unaddressed. To overcome these limitations, we introduce Native Reasoning Training (NRT), a novel framework that cultivates complex reasoning by having the model generate its own reasoning traces using only standard question-answer pairs, thereby obviating the need for expert-written demonstrations. NRT reframes the training problem by treating the reasoning process as a latent variable. It employs a unified training objective that models reasoning as an optimization problem, intrinsically rewarding paths that increase the model's likelihood of producing the ground-truth answer. This unified perspective allows us to analyze intrinsic failure modes of prior methods, such as policy collapse, and systematically design more robust reward aggregation functions, creating a self-correcting feedback loop where the model learns to \textit{think} in ways that resolve its own uncertainty. Empirical evaluation on Llama and Mistral model families demonstrates that NRT achieves state-of-the-art performance among verifier-free methods, significantly outperforming standard SFT baselines and prior verifier-free RL methods. Our approach yields particularly strong performance gains in complex reasoning domains and exhibits high robustness to policy collapse, offering a general, scalable path toward building more powerful and broadly applicable reasoning systems.

Fine-tuning Large Language Models (LLMs) typically involves either full fine-tuning, which updates all model parameters, or Parameter-Efficient Fine-Tuning (PEFT), which adjusts a small subset of parameters. However, both approaches have inherent limitations: full fine-tuning is computationally expensive, while PEFT often struggles to learn new knowledge and exhibits suboptimal performance. To overcome these issues, we propose a novel *hybrid fine-tuning* approach that jointly updates both LLMs and PEFT modules using a combination of zeroth-order and first-order optimization methods. To analyze our new algorithm, we develop a theoretical framework centered on the concept of *hybrid smoothness condition*, which accounts for the heterogeneous nature of the optimization landscape in joint LLM and PEFT training. We derive a rigorous convergence analysis for the convergence of reshuffling-type SGD algorithm under multiple learning rates and demonstrate its effectiveness through extensive empirical studies across various downstream tasks and model architectures. On the practical side, our results demonstrate consistent performance improvement, making the approach a viable solution for large-scale language model fine-tuning.

Reliable certification of Large Language Models (LLMs)—verifying that failure rates are below a safety threshold—is critical yet challenging. While "LLM-as-a-Judge" offers scalability, judge imperfections, noise, and bias can invalidate statistical guarantees. We introduce a "Noisy but Valid" hypothesis testing framework to address this. By leveraging a small human-labelled calibration set to estimate the judge's True Positive and False Positive Rates (TPR/FPR), we derive a variance-corrected critical threshold applied to a large judge-labelled dataset. Crucially, our framework theoretically guarantees finite-sample Type-I error control (validity) despite calibration uncertainty. This distinguishes our work from Prediction-Powered Inference (PPI), positioning our method as a diagnostic tool that explicitly models judge behavior rather than a black-box estimator. Our contributions include: (1) Theoretical Guarantees: We derive the exact conditions under which noisy testing yields higher statistical power than direct evaluation; (2) Empirical Validation: Experiments on Jigsaw Comment, Hate Speech and SafeRLHF confirm our theory; (3) The Oracle Gap: We reveal a significant performance gap between practical methods and the theoretical "Oracle" (perfectly known judge parameters), quantifying the cost of estimation. Specifically, we provide the first systematic treatment of the imperfect-judge setting, yielding interpretable diagnostics of judge reliability and clarifying how evaluation power depends on judge quality, dataset size, and certification levels. Together, these results sharpen understanding of statistical evaluation with LLM judges, and highlight trade-offs among competing inferential tools.

Instruction tuning improves the LLMs performance but depends on high-quality training data. Recently, LLMs have been used to synthesize data, enhancing training with seeds like question-answer (QA) pairs. However, this synthesis often results in instruction examples similar to the seeds, lacking diversity and biasing real applications. Thus, we propose to extract instruction tuning data from web corpus with much rich knowledge. The most straightforward strategy is to quickly retrieve domain specific documents from the corpus and then extract all QA pairs of these documents for tuning LLMs, which has two main limitations. (1) Extracting all QA pairs using LLMs is prohibitively expensive; and (2) These extracted pairs are not all beneficial for the downstream applications, and incorporating all of them for tuning may even hurt the model performance. To overcome the limitations, we introduce $\texttt{EQUAL}$, an $\textbf{E}$ffective and scalable data extraction framework that iteratively interleaves document selection and extract high-$\textbf{QUAL}$ity QA pairs to optimize instruction tuning. $\texttt{EQUAL}$ first clusters the document set based on the embeddings generated by contrastive learning. Then it leverages the multi-armed bandit based strategy to quickly identify document clusters where can extract high-quality QA pairs for training. This iterative framework significantly reduces computational costs while improving model performance much. Experiments on AutoMathText, KnowledgePile and StackOverflow across 13 downstream tasks demonstrate that $\texttt{EQUAL}$ reduces computational costs by 5–10$\times$ while improving accuracy by 2.5\% on LLaMA-3.1-8B, Qwen2.5-7B and Mistral-7B. Code and data is available at https://anonymous.4open.science/r/EQUAL-DD20.

Activation steering, or representation engineering, offers a lightweight approach to align large language models (LLMs) by manipulating their internal activations at inference time. However, current methods suffer from two key limitations: \textit{(i)} the lack of a unified theoretical framework for guiding the design of steering directions, and \textit{(ii)} an over-reliance on \textit{one-step steering} that fail to capture complex patterns of activation distributions. In this work, we propose a unified ordinary differential equations (ODEs)-based \textit{theoretical} framework for activation steering in LLM alignment. We show that conventional activation addition can be interpreted as a first-order approximation to the solution of an ODE. Based on this ODE perspective, identifying a steering direction becomes equivalent to designing a \textit{barrier function} from control theory. Derived from this framework, we introduce ODESteer, a kind of ODE-based steering guided by barrier functions, which shows \textit{empirical} advancement in LLM alignment. ODESteer identifies steering directions by defining the barrier function as the log-density ratio between positive and negative activations, and employs it to construct an ODE for \textit{multi-step and adaptive} steering. Compared to state-of-the-art activation steering methods, ODESteer achieves consistent empirical improvements on diverse LLM alignment benchmarks, a notable $5.7\%$ improvement over TruthfulQA, $2.5\%$ over UltraFeedback, and $2.4\%$ over RealToxicityPrompts. Our work establishes a principled new view of activation steering in LLM alignment by unifying its theoretical foundations via ODEs, and validating it empirically through the proposed ODESteer method.

Recent advances in reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs) are largely driven by reinforcement learning (RL), yet the underlying parameter dynamics during RL training remain poorly understood. This work identifies two fundamental properties of RL-induced parameter updates in LLMs: (1) Rank-1 Dominance, where the top singular subspace of the parameter update matrix nearly fully determines reasoning improvements, recovering over 99\% of performance gains; and (2) Rank-1 Linear Dynamics, where this dominant subspace evolves linearly throughout training, enabling accurate prediction from early checkpoints. Extensive experiments across 13 LLMs and 10 algorithms validate the generalizability of these properties. More importantly, based on these findings, we propose AlphaRL, a plug-in acceleration framework that extrapolates the final parameter update using a short early training window, achieving up to 2.5× speedup while retaining > 96\% of reasoning performance without extra modules or hyperparameter tuning. This positions our finding as a versatile and practical tool for large-scale RL, opening a path toward principled, interpretable, and efficient training paradigm for LLMs.

The LLM-as-a-judge paradigm is widely used in both evaluating free-text model responses and reward modeling for model alignment and fine-tuning. Recently, fine-tuning judges with judge-specific data has emerged as an often preferred choice over directly prompting frontier models as judges, as the former achieves better performance with smaller model sizes while being more robust to common biases. However, the standard evaluation ignores several practical concerns of fine-tuned judges regarding their real-world deployment. In this paper, we identify and formalize three aspects that affect the *shelf life* of these judges: *future-proofing* and *backward-compatibility* $-$ how well judges fine-tuned on responses by today's generator models perform on responses by future models or past models, as well as *question generalization* $-$ how well judges generalize to unseen questions at test time. We study these three aspects under a unified framework with varying train and test distributions in two reasoning datasets, three SFT- and DPO-based fine-tuning algorithms, and three different backbone models. Experiments suggest that future-proofing is challenging for most models, while backward-compatibility is relatively easy, with DPO-trained models consistently *improving* performance. We further find that continual learning provides a more balanced adaptation to shifts between older and newer response distributions than training solely on stronger or weaker responses. Moreover, all models exhibit some degree of performance degradation when moving from questions seen during training to unseen ones, showing that current judges do not fully generalize to unseen questions. These findings provide insights into practical considerations for developing and deploying judge models in the face of ever-changing generators.

Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT) and Reinforcement Learning (RL) are two prominent post-training paradigms for refining the capabilities and aligning the behavior of Large Language Models (LLMs). Existing approaches that integrate SFT and RL often face the risk of disrupting established response patterns and inducing overfitting to expert data. To address this, we present a novel investigation into the unified view of SFT and RL through an off-policy versus on-policy lens. We propose CHORD, a framework for Controllable Harmonization of On- and Off-Policy Reinforcement Learning via Dynamic Weighting, which reframes SFT not as a separate stage but as a dynamically weighted auxiliary objective within the on-policy RL process. Based on an analysis of off-policy expert data's influence at both holistic and granular levels, we incorporate a dual-control mechanism in CHORD. Specifically, the framework first employs a global coefficient to holistically guide the transition from off-policy imitation to on-policy exploration, and then applies a token-wise weighting function that enables granular learning from the expert, which promotes on-policy exploration and mitigates disruption from off-policy data. We conduct extensive experiments across various practical tasks, providing empirical evidence that CHORD achieves a stable and efficient learning process. By effectively harmonizing off-policy expert data with on-policy exploration, CHORD demonstrates significant improvements over baselines. We will release the source code to inspire further research.

Generative AI excels in various tasks through advanced language modeling techniques, with its performance heavily influenced by input prompts. This has driven significant research into prompt optimization, particularly in commercial generative AI platforms, where prompt optimization is treated as a black-box optimization problem. Most existing research on black-box prompt optimization primarily focuses on offline learning and overlooks the randomness in outputs. However, in real-world applications, black-box prompt optimization typically operates in an online learning setting, which remains largely unexplored, especially given the noisy outputs. To address these challenges, we propose an \textbf{A}daptive \textbf{O}nline \textbf{Z}eroth-order \textbf{P}rompt \textbf{T}uning (AOZPT) approach which integrates zeroth-order optimization with online learning in the non-convex setting. Specifically, we developed an uncertainty-scale-adjustment mechanism to mitigate the noise inherent in generative AI and the high variance associated with zeroth-order estimates. We conducted a comprehensive regret analysis of the AOZPT approach, and the results indicate that sublinear regret convergence is achievable. Extensive generative experiments demonstrate that AOZPT outperforms existing black-box prompt tuning methods, particularly in terms of stability in online scenarios.

Large language models (LLMs) achieve strong downstream performance largely due to abundant supervised fine-tuning (SFT) data that imparts problem-solving capabilities. However, as applications expand, high-quality SFT data in knowledge-intensive verticals (e.g., humanities and social sciences, medicine, law, finance) is exceedingly scarce: expert curation is costly, privacy constraints are strict, and label consistency is hard to guarantee. Recent work turns to synthetic data, typically prompting a teacher model over domain documents and filtering with handcrafted rubrics. Yet, rubric design is expert-dependent and rarely transfers across domains; moreover, prevalent heuristic optimization follows a brittle loop (write rubric $\rightarrow$ synthesize $\rightarrow$ train $\rightarrow$ inspect $\rightarrow$ guess tweaks) that lacks reliable, quantitative feedback about a rubric's true contribution to downstream performance. We argue for assessing synthetic data quality through its causal impact on the target model, using this feedback to guide data generation. Inspired by classic influence functions, we repurpose an optimizer-aware estimator that uses gradient information to quantify each synthetic sample's contribution to the objective of a given target model on specific tasks. Our analysis reveals a gap: although synthetic and real samples may be close in embedding space, their influence on learning can differ substantially. Building on this insight, we propose an optimization-based synthetic data framework that adapts rubrics with target-model feedback. Instead of manually engineering domain rubrics, we supply lightweight guiding text and delegate rubric generation to a rubric-specialized model conditioned on the task; crucially, rubric (and data) selection is supervised by estimated downstream impact rather than proxy formality. Empirically, the framework yields consistent gains across domains (HSS and health), target models (e.g., Qwen and Llama families), and data generators, demonstrating broad generalization and engineering portability without task-specific tuning.

Hallucination has recently garnered significant research attention in Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs). Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) aims to learn directly from the corrected preferences provided by humans, thereby addressing the hallucination issue. Despite its success, this paradigm has yet to specifically target the perceptual bottleneck in attended regions or address insufficient Visual Robustness against image degradation. Furthermore, existing preference pairs are often vision-agnostic and their inherently off-policy nature limits their effectiveness in guiding model learning. To address these challenges, we propose Perceptual Processing Direct Preference Optimization (P$^2$-DPO), a novel training paradigm in which the model generates and learns from its own preference pairs, thereby directly addressing the identified visual bottlenecks while inherently avoiding the issues of vision-agnostic and off-policy data. It introduces: (1) an on-policy preference pairs construction method targeting Focus-and-Enhance perception and Visual Robustness, and (2) a well-designed Calibration Loss to precisely align visual signals with the causal generation of text. Experimental results demonstrate that with a comparable amount of training data and cost, P$^2$-DPO outperforms strong baselines that rely on costly human feedback on benchmarks. Furthermore, evaluations on Attention Region Fidelity (ARF) and image degradation scenarios validate the effectiveness of P$^2$-DPO in addressing perceptual bottleneck in attended regions and improving Visual Robustness against degraded inputs.

Personalization has become a pivotal field of study in contemporary intelligent systems. While large language models (LLMs) excel at general knowledge tasks, they often struggle with personalization, i.e., adapting their outputs to individual user expectations. Existing approaches that steer LLM behavior to meet users’ implicit preferences and behavior patterns, primarily relying on tune-free methods (e.g., RAG, PAG) or parameter fine-tuning methods (e.g., LoRA), face challenges in effectively balancing effectiveness and efficiency. Moreover, the mechanisms underlying personalized preferences remain underexplored. To address these challenges, we first uncover key patterns of user-specific information embedded in the representation space. Specifically, we find that (1) personalized information lies within a low-rank subspace represented by vectors, and (2) these vectors demonstrate both a collective shift shared across users and a personalized shift unique to each individual user. Building on these insights, we introduce PerFit, a novel two-stage solution that directly fine-tunes interventions in the hidden representation space by addressing both collective and user-specific shifts, thereby achieving precise steering of LLM with minimal parameter overhead. Experimental results demonstrate that \perfit delivers strong performance across six datasets while \cutting the number of parameters by an average of 92.3% compared to the state-of-the-art method.

Enhancing the multimodal reasoning capabilities of Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) is a challenging task that has attracted increasing attention in the community. Recently, several studies have applied Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) to the multimodal domain in order to enhance the reasoning abilities of MLLMs. However, these works largely overlook the enhancement of multimodal perception capabilities in MLLMs, which serve as a core prerequisite and foundational component of complex multimodal reasoning. Through McNemar's test, we find that existing RLVR method fails to effectively enhance the multimodal perception capabilities of MLLMs, thereby limiting their further improvement in multimodal reasoning. To address this limitation, we propose Perception-R1, which introduces a novel visual perception reward that explicitly encourages MLLMs to perceive the visual content accurately, thereby can effectively incentivizing both their multimodal perception and reasoning capabilities. Specifically, we first collect textual visual annotations from the CoT trajectories of multimodal problems, which will serve as visual references for reward assignment. During RLVR training, we employ a judging LLM to assess the consistency between the visual annotations and the responses generated by MLLM, and assign the visual perception reward based on these consistency judgments. Extensive experiments on several multimodal math and general benchmarks demonstrate the effectiveness and robustness of our Perception-R1, which achieves superior performance on all benchmarks using only 1,442 training data. Our code and dataset will be available at https://github.com/tongxiao2002/Perception-R1.

Large language models (LLMs) have recently been applied to forecasting tasks, with some works claiming these systems match or exceed human performance. In this paper, we argue that, as a community, we should be careful about such conclusions as evaluating LLM forecasters presents unique challenges. We identify two broad categories of issues: (1) difficulty in trusting evaluation results due to many forms of temporal leakage, and (2) difficulty in extrapolating from evaluation performance to real-world forecasting. Through systematic analysis and concrete examples from prior work, we demonstrate how evaluation flaws can raise concerns about current and future performance claims. We argue that more rigorous evaluation methodologies are needed to confidently assess the forecasting abilities of LLMs.

Reinforcement learning has emerged as a popular method for post-training large language models (LLMs). While improving the model's performance on downstream tasks, it often reduces the model's output diversity, leading to narrow, canonical responses. Existing methods to enhance diversity are limited, either by operating at inference time or by focusing on lexical differences. We propose a novel training method named DQO (Diversity Quality Optimization) based on determinantal point processes (DPPs) to jointly optimize LLMs for quality and semantic diversity. Our approach samples and embeds a group of responses for each prompt, then uses the determinant of a kernel-based similarity matrix to measure diversity as the volume spanned by the embeddings of these responses. Experiments across instruction-following, summarization, story generation, and reasoning tasks demonstrate that our method substantially improves semantic diversity without sacrificing model quality.

Current large language model (LLM) development treats task-solving and preference-alignment as separate challenges, optimizing first for objective correctness, then for alignment to aggregated human preferences. This paradigm fails in human-facing applications where solving a problem correctly is insufficient if the response mismatches the user’s needs. This challenge intensifies in just-in-time scenarios where no prior user interaction history exists due to cold-start conditions or privacy constraints. LLMs need to proactively identify what they don’t know about the user, strategically elicit preference values through questioning, then adapt their reasoning processes and responses accordingly—a complicated chain of cognitive processes which we term personalized reasoning. We introduce PREFDISCO, an evaluation methodology that transforms static benchmarks into interactive personalization tasks using psychologically-grounded personas with sparse, context-dependent preferences, and define PREFALIGN as a fine-grained rubric-based metric for measuring preference alignment. PREFDISCO builds scenarios where identical questions require different reasoning chains depending on user context, as optimal explanation approaches vary by individual expertise and preferences while maintaining factual accuracy. Evaluation of 21 frontier models across 10 tasks reveals 29.0% of naive personalization attempts produce worse preference alignment than generic responses, yet generic responses also fail to serve individual user needs. These findings suggest personalized reasoning requires dedicated development rather than emerging naturally. PREFDISCO provides a foundation for developing systems that can adapt to individual users in education, healthcare, and technical domains where personalization is critical.

In this paper, we explore how directly pretraining a value model simplifies and stabilizes reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF). In reinforcement learning, value estimation is the key to policy optimization, distinct from reward supervision. The value function predicts the \emph{return-to-go} of a partial answer, that is, how promising the partial answer is if it were continued to completion. In RLHF, however, the standard pipeline first pretrains a reward model and then learns a value function online, even though no new reward signals are available once preference data is collected. This makes critic learning redundant, as the process of training a reward model and then deriving a value model is informationally equivalent to directly pretraining a value model. Importantly, this requires no additional supervision, and our value model is trained on exactly the same data used for reward modeling. Building on this insight, we introduce \emph{Decoupled Value Policy Optimization} (DVPO), a framework that pretrains a \emph{Global Value Model} (GVM) offline and freezes it as a universal critic for policy learning. The GVM provides stable, fine-grained credit assignment without critic drift or trajectory sampling. Experiments across MT-Bench, Alpaca-Eval, and Arena-Hard demonstrate that DVPO matches or surpasses state-of-the-art RLHF methods. These results highlight RLHF can be reframed as policy-only optimization guided by a single pretrained value model. The implementation code for our method is available in \url{https://github.com/microsoft/DKI_LLM/tree/main/dvpo}

Reinforcement Learning (RL) has proven highly effective for autoregressive language models, but adapting these methods to diffusion large language models (dLLMs) presents fundamental challenges. The core difficulty lies in likelihood approximation: while autoregressive models naturally provide token-level conditional probabilities essential for token-level RL objectives (e.g., GRPO), dLLMs generate sequences through iterative non-autoregressive denoising steps that lack this factorization. To address this fundamental mismatch, we propose ELBO-based Sequence-level Policy Optimization (ESPO), a principled RL framework that treats entire sequence generation as a single action and uses the ELBO as a tractable sequence-level likelihood proxy. Our method incorporates per-token normalization of importance ratios and robust KL-divergence estimation to ensure stable large-scale training. Extensive experiments on mathematical reasoning, coding, and planning tasks demonstrate that ESPO significantly outperforms token-level baselines, achieving dramatic improvements of 20-40 points on the Countdown task, while maintaining consistent gains on math and coding benchmarks. Our approach establishes sequence-level optimization as a principled and empirically effective paradigm for RL in dLLMs.

Large language models (LLMs) are typically trained to acquire behaviours from demonstrations or experience, yet much of their training data is declarative: instructions, rules, and descriptions that specify behaviours without showing how to execute them. We introduce **Programming by Backprop (PBB)**: a training regime that enables LLMs to acquire *procedural* knowledge (i.e., reusable behaviours) from *declarative* instructions encountered during training. With PBB, instructions in training data provide an opportunity to "program" specific behaviours into model weights. The core principle underpinning PBB is the separation of learning how instructions map to behaviour from internalising new instructions. We devise two distinct PBB curricula that leverage this principle. Through controlled experiments across two domains (algorithmic execution from Python source code and text generation from context-free grammars), we demonstrate the benefit of these curricula over training on a homogeneous data mixture. Crucially, PBB is highly sample efficient, with *a single instruction substituting for up to 100 execution examples*. Though execution of instructions in training data remains less reliable than when instructions are given in-context, our results demonstrate that procedural knowledge can be noisily `programmed' into LLMs through PBB, with important implications for data curation and safety.

A popular method to adapt large language models (LLMs) to new tasks is in-context learning (ICL), which is effective but incurs high inference costs as context length grows. In this paper we propose a method to perform instruction induction, where we take training examples and reduce them to a compact but descriptive prompt that can achieve performance comparable to ICL over the full training set. Specifically, we propose Prompt-MII, a reinforcement learning (RL) based framework to meta-learn an instruction induction model that can generate compact instructions on the fly for an arbitrary new dataset. We train on over 3,000 diverse classification datasets from the HuggingFace hub, and evaluate on 90 unseen tasks. Prompt-MII improves downstream model quality by 4-9 F1 points (10-20\% relative), matching ICL performance while requiring 3-13x fewer tokens.

Reinforcement learning has been central to recent advances in large language model reasoning, but most algorithms rely on on-policy training that demands fresh rollouts at every update, limiting efficiency and scalability. Asynchronous RL systems alleviate this by decoupling rollout generation from training, yet their effectiveness hinges on tolerating large staleness in rollout data, a setting where existing methods either degrade in performance or collapse. We revisit this challenge and uncover a \emph{prosperity-before-collapse} phenomenon: stale data can be as informative as on-policy data if exploited properly. Building on this insight, we introduce \textbf{M2PO} (Second-Moment Trust Policy Optimization), which constrains the second moment of importance weights to suppress only extreme outliers while preserving informative updates. Notably, M2PO sharply reduces the fraction of clipped tokens under high staleness (from 1.22\% to 0.06\% over training), precisely masking high-variance tokens while maintaining stable optimization. Extensive evaluation across six model scales (from 1.7B to 32B) and eight math reasoning benchmarks and one coding benchmarks shows that M2PO delivers stable off-policy training even with data stale by \underline{\emph{at least 256 model updates}} and matches on-policy performance. Our code is available at https://github.com/Infini-AI-Lab/M2PO/.

Supervised fine-tuning (SFT) of foundation models often leads to poor generalization, where prior capabilities deteriorate after tuning on specific tasks. Inspired by trust-region policy optimization (TRPO) and proximal policy optimization (PPO) in reinforcement learning (RL), we propose Proximal SFT (PSFT), a fine-tuning objective that incorporates the benefits of trust-region, effectively constraining policy drift during SFT while maintaining competitive tuning. By viewing SFT as a special case of policy gradient methods with constant positive advantages, we derive PSFT that stabilizes optimization and leads to generalization, while leaving room for further optimization in subsequent post-training stages. Experiments across mathematical, human-value, and multimodal domains show that PSFT matches standard SFT in-domain, outperforms it in out-of-domain generalization, remains stable under prolonged training without causing entropy collapse, and provides a stronger foundation for the subsequent optimization.

Recent advances in Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) have demonstrated strong performance on complex tasks through long Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning. However, their lengthy outputs increase computational costs and may lead to overthinking, raising challenges in balancing reasoning effectiveness and efficiency. Current solutions often compromise reasoning quality or require extensive resources. In this paper, we investigate how to reduce the generation length of LRMs with limited tuning. We analyze generation path distributions and filter generated trajectories through difficulty estimation. Subsequently, we analyze the convergence characteristics of various preference optimization objectives under a unified Bradley-Terry loss based framework. Based on the analysis, we propose Length Controlled Preference Optimization (LCPO) that directly balances the implicit reward related to NLL loss. LCPO can effectively learn length preference with limited data and training. Extensive experiments demonstrate that our method significantly reduces the average output length of LRMs by over 50\% across multiple benchmarks while maintaining the reasoning performance. Our work highlights the potential for computationally efficient approaches in guiding LRMs toward efficient reasoning.

Reinforcement Learning from Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) has significantly improved the performance of large language models (LLMs) on tasks with gold ground truth, such as code generation and mathematical reasoning. However, its application to open-ended question answering (QA) remains challenging, primarily due to the absence of reliable evaluation and verifiable reward signals. This difficulty is further compounded by the limitations of existing evaluation paradigms. Previous approaches typically rely on human feedback or LLM-as-judge strategies, which are costly, prone to reward hacking, and often fail to provide sufficiently discriminative or interpretable evaluation signals. To address these limitations, we introduce a schema for generating case-wise rubrics that are question-specific, content-based and stylistically sensitive, thereby evaluating both factual soundness and writing quality. Building on this schema, we propose QuRL (Open-Ended QA with Rubric-guided Reinforcement Learning), a framework that automatically mines rubrics for each question from easily accessible online sources and leverages them as reward signals. With these rubrics, QuRL employs the GRPO (Group Relative Policy Optimization) algorithm to guide the model in exploring the correct generation path. Extensive experiments show that our framework achieves significant improvements of total +17.0 points on evaluation benchmark, demonstrating the effectiveness of rubric-guided reinforcement learning for open-ended QA.

In post-training for reasoning Large Language Models (LLMs), the current state of practice trains LLMs in two independent stages: Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT) and Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR, shortened as "RL" below). In this work, we challenge whether high SFT scores translate to improved performance after RL. We provide extensive counter-examples where this is not true. We find high SFT scores can be biased toward simpler or more homogeneous data and are not reliably predictive of subsequent RL gains or scaled-up post-training effectiveness. In some cases, RL training on models with improved SFT performance could lead to substantially worse outcome compared to RL on the base model without SFT. We study alternative metrics and identify generalization loss on held-out reasoning examples and Pass@large k performance to provide strong proxies for the RL outcome. We trained hundreds of models up to 12B-parameter with SFT and RLVR via GRPO and ran extensive evaluations on 7 math benchmarks with up to 256 repetitions, spending $>$1M GPU hours. Experiments include models from Llama3, Mistral-Nemo, Qwen3 and multiple state-of-the-art SFT/RL datasets. Compared to directly predicting from pre-RL performance, prediction based on generalization loss and Pass@large k achieves substantial higher precision, improving $R^2$ coefficient and Spearman's rank correlation coefficient by up to 0.5 (2x). This provides strong utility for broad use cases. For example, in most experiments, we find SFT training on unique examples for a one epoch underperforms training on half examples for two epochs, either after SFT or SFT-then-RL; With the same SFT budget, training only on short examples may lead to better SFT performance, though, it often leads to worse outcome after RL compared to training on examples with varying lengths. This work develops an enhanced evaluation tool for math reasoning tasks and is open-sourced.

Practical guidance on training Large Language Models (LLMs) to leverage Code Interpreter across diverse tasks remains lacking. We present R1-Code-Interpreter, an extension of a text-only LLM trained via multi-turn supervised fine-tuning (SFT) and reinforcement learning (RL) to autonomously generate multiple code queries during step-by-step reasoning. Unlike prior RL + tool-use efforts focused on narrow domains such as math or retrieval, we curate 144 diverse reasoning and planning tasks and show that training a general-purpose Code Interpreter across them presents significant challenges due to task heterogeneity and scarcity of effective samples. To address this, we introduce a multi-stage curriculum learning approach that partitions training samples by measured improvement potential. The RL training prioritizes samples with higher potential and gradually shifts to lower-potential ones, increasing the average RL gains from merely +3.4\% to +9.3\% across Qwen-2.5 models (3/7/14B). Our final model, R1-CI-14B, improves average accuracy on the 37 test tasks from 44.1\% to 72.4\%, outperforming text-only GPT-4o (58.6\%) and GPT-4o with Code Interpreter (70.9\%). Notably, R1-CI-14B also exhibits emergent self-checking behavior through code generation. Datasets, Codes, and Models are available at https://github.com/yongchao98/R1-Code-Interpreter and https://huggingface.co/yongchao98.

It remains an open question whether LLMs can acquire or generalize genuinely new reasoning strategies, beyond the sharpened skills encoded in their parameters during pre-training or post-training. To attempt to answer this debate, we introduce DELTA — Distributional Evaluation of Learnability and Transferrability in Algorithmic Coding, a controlled benchmark of synthetic coding problem families designed to probe two fundamental aspects: learnability—can LLMs, through reinforcement learning (RL), solve problem families where pretrained models exhibit failure with large enough attempts (pass@K=0)?—and transferability—if learnability happens, can such skills transfer systematically to out-of-distribution (OOD) test sets? Unlike prior public coding datasets, DELTA isolates reasoning skills through templated problem generators and introduces fully OOD problem families that demand novel strategies rather than tool invocation or memorized patterns. Our experiments reveal a striking grokking phase transition: after an extended period with near-zero reward, RL-trained models abruptly climb to near-perfect accuracy. To enable learnability on previously unsolvable problem families, we explore key training ingredients such as staged warm-up with dense rewards, experience replay, curriculum training, and verification-in-the-loop. Beyond learnability, we use DELTA to evaluate transferability or generalization along exploratory, compositional, and transformative axes, as well as cross-family transfer. Results show solid gains within families and for recomposed skills, but persistent weaknesses in transformative cases. DELTA thus offers a clean testbed for probing the limits of RL-driven reasoning and for understanding how models can move beyond existing priors to acquire new algorithmic skills.

Comparison of fine-tuning models with reinforcement learning (RL) and supervised fine-tuning (SFT) reveals that, despite similar performance at a new task, RL preserves prior knowledge and capabilities significantly better. We find that the degree of forgetting is determined by the distributional shift, measured as the KL-divergence between the fine-tuned and base policy evaluated on the new task. Our analysis reveals that on-policy RL is implicitly biased towards KL-minimal solutions among the many that solve the new task, whereas SFT can converge to distributions arbitrarily far from the base model. We validate these findings through experiments with large language models and robotic foundation models and further provide theoretical justification for why on-policy RL updates lead to a smaller KL change. We term this principle $\textit{RL’s Razor}$: among all ways to solve a new task, RL prefers those closest in KL to the original model.

Open-ended generation tasks require outputs to satisfy diverse and often implicit task-specific evaluation rubrics. The sheer number of relevant rubrics leads to prohibitively high verification costs and incomplete assessments of a response, making reinforcement learning (RL) post-training with rubric-based rewards difficult to scale. This problem is exacerbated by the fact that often the best way to combine these rubrics into one single reward is also highly prompt-specific. We propose Reinforcement Learning with Adversarial Critic (RLAC), a post-training approach that addresses these challenges via dynamic rubric verification. Our approach employs a large language model (LLM) as a critic that dynamically identifies only the most likely failure modes (e.g., a factual error or unhandled edge case), which are then verified by an external validator to optimize both generator and critic jointly. By training both the generator and the critic, this game enhances the critic's error detection and the generator's output quality while reducing required verifications. Our experiments demonstrate that RLAC improves factual accuracy in text generation and correctness in code generation, while also outperforming exhaustive verification and reward model methods. We show that dynamic critics are more effective than fixed critics, showcasing the potential of RLAC for scaling RL post-training to free-form generation tasks.

Reinforcement Learning with Human Feedback (RLHF) and Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) are the main RL paradigms used in LLM post-training, each offering distinct advantages. However, RLHF struggles with interpretability and reward hacking because it relies on human judgments that usually lack explicit criteria, whereas RLVR is limited in scope by its focus on correctness-based verifiers. We propose Reinforcement Learning with Binary Flexible Feedback (RLBFF), which combines the versatility of human-driven preferences with the precision of rule-based verification, enabling reward models to capture nuanced aspects of response quality beyond mere correctness. RLBFF extracts principles that can be answered in a binary fashion (e.g. accuracy of information: yes, or code readability: no) from natural language feedback. Such principles can then be used to ground Reward Model training as an entailment task (response satisfies or does not satisfy an arbitrary principle). We show that Reward Models trained in this manner can outperform Bradley-Terry models when matched for data and achieve top performance on RM-Bench (86.2\%) and JudgeBench (81.4\%, \#1 on leaderboard as of September 24, 2025). Additionally, users can specify principles of interest at inference time to customize the focus of our reward models, in contrast to Bradley-Terry models. Finally, we present a fully open source recipe (including data) to align Qwen3-32B using RLBFF and our Reward Model, to match or exceed the performance of o3-mini and DeepSeek R1 on general alignment benchmarks of MT-Bench, WildBench, and Arena Hard v2 (at $<5$\% of the inference cost).

Reward modeling is essential for aligning large language models with human preferences through reinforcement learning. To provide accurate reward signals, a reward model (RM) should stimulate deep thinking and conduct interpretable reasoning before assigning a score or a judgment. Inspired by recent advances of long chain-of-thought on reasoning-intensive tasks, we hypothesize and validate that integrating reasoning into reward modeling significantly enhances RM's interpretability and performance. We introduce a new class of generative reward models, Reasoning Reward Models (ReasRMs), which formulate reward modeling as a reasoning task. We propose a reasoning-oriented training pipeline and train a family of ReasRMs, RM-R1. RM-R1 features a chain-of-rubrics (CoR) mechanism -- self-generating sample-level chat rubrics or math/code solutions, and evaluating candidate responses against them. The training of RM-R1 consists of two key stages: (1) distillation of high-quality reasoning chains and (2) reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards. Empirically, our models achieve superior performance across three reward model benchmarks on average, outperforming much larger open-weight models (e.g., INF-ORM-Llama3.1-70B) and proprietary ones (e.g., GPT-4o) by up to 4.9%. Beyond final performance, we perform thorough analyses to understand the key ingredients of successful ReasRM training.

Large language models (LLMs) are reshaping the recommender system paradigm by enabling users to express preferences and receive recommendations through conversations. Yet, aligning LLMs to the recommendation task remains challenging: pretrained LLMs often generate out-of-catalog items, violate required output formats, and their ranking quality degrades sharply toward the end of the generated list. To this end, we propose ConvRec-R1, a two-stage framework for end-to-end training of LLM-based conversational recommender systems. In Stage 1, we construct a behavioral-cloning dataset with a Remap-Reflect-Adjust pipeline, which produces high-quality, catalog-grounded demonstrations from powerful blackbox LLMs to warm-start the RL training. In Stage 2, we propose Rank-GRPO, a principled extension of group relative policy optimization (GRPO) tailored to tasks with rank-style outputs. Rank-GRPO treats each rank in the recommendation list as the unit instead of token (too fine-grained) or sequence (too coarse), redefining rewards to remove non-causal credit assignment and introducing a rank-level importance ratio based on the geometric mean of rank-wise token probabilities to stabilize policy updates. Experiments on the on the Reddit-v2 and Redial datasets show that ConvRec-R1 converges faster and achieves higher Recall and NDCG than GRPO-style baselines. Code and datasets are released at https://github.com/yaochenzhu/Rank-GRPO.

The recent paradigm shift towards training large language models (LLMs) using DeepSeek-R1-Zero-style reinforcement learning (RL) on verifiable rewards has led to impressive advancements in code and mathematical reasoning. However, this methodology is limited to tasks where rule-based answer verification is possible and does not naturally extend to real-world domains such as chemistry, healthcare, engineering, law, biology, business, and economics. Current practical workarounds use an additional LLM as a model-based verifier; however, this introduces issues such as reliance on a strong verifier LLM, susceptibility to reward hacking, and the practical burden of maintaining the verifier model in memory during training. To address this and extend DeepSeek-R1-Zero-style training to general reasoning domains, we propose a verifier-free method (**VeriFree**) that bypasses answer verification and instead directly maximizes the probability of generating the reference answer, derived in a principled way from the RL objective. We compare VeriFree with verifier-based methods and demonstrate that, in addition to its significant practical benefits and reduced compute requirements, VeriFree matches and even surpasses verifier-based methods on extensive evaluations across MMLU-Pro, GPQA, SuperGPQA, and math-related benchmarks.

Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) improves performance on knowledge-intensive tasks but can be derailed by wrong, irrelevant, or conflicting retrieved text, causing models to rely on inaccurate evidence and cascade errors. We propose Knowledgeable-R1, a reinforcement-learning framework that explicitly trains large language models to use parametric knowledge (PK) to resist contextual interference while still exploiting external context when it is reliably helpful. Knowledgeable-R1 introduces a joint sampling scheme that generates paired responses with and without retrieval, and learns both local advantages (within each decoding regime) and global advantages under the same input to quantify when to ignore misleading context versus adopt it. We employ an asymmetric advantage transformation that amplifies exploratory behaviors toward parametric knowledge. Experiments show that Knowledgeable-R1 significantly improves robustness and reasoning accuracy in knowledge conflict scenarios and general RAG scenarios, outperforming SOTA baselines by +22.89% in counterfactual scenarios, and without degradation when the retrieved context is fully accurate.

Large Vision-Language Models (VLMs) have achieved remarkable performance across a wide range of tasks. However, their deployment in safety-critical domains poses significant challenges. Existing safety fine-tuning methods, which focus on textual or multimodal content, fall short in addressing challenging cases or disrupt the balance between helpfulness and harmlessness. Our evaluation highlights a safety reasoning gap: these methods lack safety visual reasoning ability, leading to such bottlenecks. To address this limitation and enhance both visual perception and reasoning in safety-critical contexts, we propose a novel dataset that integrates multi-image inputs with safety Chain-of-Thought (CoT) labels as fine-grained reasoning logic to improve model performance. Specifically, we introduce the Multi-Image Safety (MIS) dataset, an instruction-following dataset tailored for multi-image safety scenarios, consisting of training and test splits. Our experiments demonstrate that fine-tuning InternVL2.5-8B with MIS significantly outperforms both powerful open-source models and API-based models in challenging multi-image tasks requiring safety-related visual reasoning. This approach not only delivers exceptional safety performance but also preserves general capabilities without any trade-offs. Specifically, fine-tuning with MIS increases average accuracy by 0.83% across five general benchmarks and reduces the Attack Success Rate (ASR) on multiple safety benchmarks by a large margin.

Vision-language (VL) models are increasingly deployed in non-stationary settings, yet under sequential adaptation they often preserve primitive recognition while losing compositional structure, especially with tight rehearsal budgets and no task IDs. We address this gap by asking how a continual VL system can maintain structurally dependable behaviour while safeguarding zero-shot performance. We introduce Compo-ReAlign, a structure-first recipe built around three components: a reversible composer that maps primitive embeddings to compositions by design, a multi-positive InfoNCE that jointly aligns textual and composed views of the same target, and a spectral trust region that clips updates when alignment sensitivity inflates. Across compositional DIL and multi-domain MTIL retrieval, Compo-ReAlign sets a new state of the art, improves over the strongest prior by +2.4 R@1, and reduces forgetting by 40%. We provide a compact, reversible alignment head with geometry-aware training for compositionally robust VL continual learning.

The extension of diffusion models to language tasks has shown promising results, but their post-training methods remain largely unexplored. We highlight the importance of aligning a diffusion language model’s preference-inference trajectory with its post-training objective. To this end, we propose TraceRL, a trajectory-aware reinforcement learning framework for DLMs that incorporates information from inference trajectories into post-training and is applicable to both full-attention and block-attention diffusion models. We also introduce a diffusion-based value model that enhances training stability and naturally accommodates process rewards. We demonstrate TraceRL’s superiority in enhancing a model’s reasoning ability on complex math and coding tasks, as well as its applicability in scaling block diffusion models to larger block sizes. Employing TraceRL, we derive a series of state-of-the-art diffusion language models, namely TraDo. Although smaller than Qwen2.5-7B-Instruct, TraDo-4B-Instruct consistently outperforms it on complex math reasoning tasks. TraDo-8B-Instruct achieves 4.5% higher accuracy on MATH500 than Qwen2.5-7B-Instruct and 6.6% higher accuracy on LiveCodeBench-V2 than Llama3.1-8B-Instruct. Through curriculum learning, we also develop the first 8B-scale long-CoT diffusion language model. We open-source our code at [https://github.com/Gen-Verse/dLLM-RL](https://github.com/Gen-Verse/dLLM-RL).

Reinforcement learning from human or AI feedback (RLHF/RLAIF) has become the standard paradigm for aligning large language models (LLMs). However, most pipelines rely on a single reward model (RM), limiting alignment quality and risking overfitting. Recent work explores RM routing—dynamically selecting an RM from a candidate pool to exploit complementary strengths while maintaining \(O(1)\) RM calls—but existing methods suffer from cold-start and insufficient exploration. We propose {\name}, a hybrid routing framework that combines offline RM strengths learning with online Bayesian selection. In the offline stage, a multi-task router is trained on preference data to estimate per-RM reliability. In the online stage, a Bayesian Thompson sampling router performs per-query RM selection, initializing RM-specific weight vectors with offline embeddings as Gaussian priors and adaptively updating their posteriors with online rewards to adapt to the evolving policy distribution. Extensive experiments on instruction-following (AlpacaEval-2, Arena-Hard, MT-Bench) and reasoning (GSM8K, MMLU) benchmarks show that {\name} consistently outperforms individual RMs, RM ensembling, and existing routing methods.

Reward models (RMs) are central to aligning large language models (LLMs) with human values but have received less attention than pretrained and post-trained LLMs themselves. Because RMs are initialized from LLMs, they inherit representations that shape their behavior, but the nature and extent of this influence remain understudied. In a comprehensive study of 10 leading open-weight RMs using validated psycholinguistic corpora, we show that RMs exhibit significant differences along multiple dimensions of human value as a function of their base model. Using the "Big Two" psychological axes, we show a robust preference of Llama RMs for "agency" and a corresponding robust preference of Gemma RMs for "communion." This phenomenon holds even when the preference data and finetuning process are identical, and we trace it back to the logits of the respective instruction-tuned and pretrained models. These log-probability differences themselves can be formulated as an implicit RM; we derive usable implicit reward scores and show that they exhibit the very same agency/communion difference. We run experiments training RMs with ablations for preference data source and quantity, which demonstrate that this effect is not only repeatable but surprisingly durable. Despite RMs being designed to represent human preferences, our evidence shows that their outputs are influenced by the pretrained LLMs on which they are based. This work underscores the importance of safety and alignment efforts at the pretraining stage, and makes clear that open-source developers' choice of base model is as much a consideration of values as of performance.

A safe and trustworthy use of Large Language Models (LLMs) requires an accurate expression of confidence in their answers. We propose a novel Reinforcement Learning approach that allows to directly fine-tune LLMs to express calibrated confidence estimates alongside their answers to factual questions. Our method optimizes a reward based on the logarithmic scoring rule, explicitly penalizing both over- and under-confidence. This encourages the model to align its confidence estimates with the actual predictive accuracy. The optimal policy under our reward design would result in perfectly calibrated confidence expressions. Unlike prior approaches that decouple confidence estimation from response generation, our method integrates confidence calibration seamlessly into the generative process of the LLM. Empirically, we demonstrate that models trained with our approach exhibit substantially improved calibration and generalize to unseen tasks without further fine-tuning, suggesting the emergence of general confidence awareness. Our code is available at https://github.com/pasta99/RewardingDoubt.

Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) has proven effective for enhancing Large Language Models (LLMs) on complex reasoning tasks. Yet current methods face an exploration dilemma: standard RL struggles to escape the local optima of pre-trained LLMs’ sharply peaked initial policies, boosting single-solution accuracy (pass@1) but suppressing solution diversity and multi-solution performance (pass@k). As a result, RLVR often distills existing capabilities rather than discovering new reasoning strategies. We address this with a Risk-Sensitive Reinforcement Learning framework. By adopting a risk-seeking objective that interpolates between mean and maximum rewards, we derive a novel Risk-Sensitive GRPO (RS-GRPO) algorithm that emphasizes hard prompts to drive exploration. Across six mathematical reasoning benchmarks and five LLMs, RS-GRPO consistently improves pass@k performance while enhancing or maintaing pass@1.

The unlearning capability of LLMs is vital for ensuring compliance and safety, especially when removing sensitive knowledge from deployed models. Pre-filtering methods, enabling rapid deployment without parameter changes, are a prominent unlearning approach. However, they exhibit significant robustness deficiencies against adversarial attacks: in the worst case, simple prefix attacks can induce up to a 1,150-fold surge in information leakage for fictitious entity knowledge, while composite question attacks can cause accuracy on hazardous knowledge to rebound from the 24.9% random-guess baseline to as high as 67.0%. To address this, we propose a new unlearning framework via post judgment and multi-round thinking (PoRT), which consists of three key modules. First, a data cleaning module compiles a dynamic few-shot prompt that instructs the LLM to simultaneously generate both a cleaned version of the user's query and a corresponding initial response, supported by an extensible demonstration library for adaptive defense. Second, unlike existing pre-filtering methods that typically judge based solely on prompts, our post-judgment module jointly evaluates cleaned prompts and their corresponding responses to better detect non-compliant outputs. Finally, a selective multi-round thinking process is employed to trigger LLM's self-correction for low-confidence outputs, enhancing reliability and result quality. Extensive experiments on benchmarks demonstrate PoRT's superior robustness against adversarial attacks and strong unlearning effectiveness without compromising general model utility. Code is available at https://github.com/ChnIRuI/PoRT_LLM_Unlearning

We introduce Robust Multi-Objective Decoding (RMOD), a novel inference-time algorithm that robustly aligns Large Language Models (LLMs) to multiple human objectives (e.g., instruction-following, helpfulness, safety) by maximizing the worst-case rewards. RMOD formulates the robust decoding problem as a maximin two-player game between adversarially computed reward weights and the sampling policy, solvable through a Nash equilibrium. We demonstrate that this game reduces to a convex optimization problem to identify the worst-case reward weights, with the optimal sampling policy analytically derived. For practical applications, we propose an efficient algorithm of RMOD tailored for contemporary LLMs, introducing minimal computational overhead compared to standard non-robust Controlled Decoding methods. Experimental results across a range of popular alignment datasets with up to 10 objectives show the effectiveness of RMOD and its distilled version, consistently outperforming baselines in worst-case rewards and win rates.

Reward models (RMs) are fundamental to aligning Large Language Models (LLMs) via human feedback, yet they often suffer from reward hacking. They tend to latch on to superficial or spurious attributes, such as response length or formatting, mistaking these cues learned from correlations in training data for the true causal drivers of quality (e.g., factuality, relevance). This occurs because standard training objectives struggle to disentangle these factors, leading to brittle RMs and misaligned policies. We introduce CROME (Causally Robust Reward Modeling), a novel framework inspired by an explicit causal model designed to mitigate reward hacking. CROME queries an oracle LLM for rubrics that are (or the oracle deems to be) causally relevant to answering a specific prompt. Then, it employs the following synthetic targeted augmentations during training: (1) Causal Augmentations, which are pairs that differ along specific causal attributes (subset of the Oracle identified rubrics), to enforce sensitivity along each causal attribute individually, and (2) Neutral Augmentations, which are tie-label pairs varying primarily in spurious attributes, to enforce invariance along spurious attributes. Notably, our neutral augmentations are produced without any knowledge of unknown spurious factors, via question swapping and response interventions only along causal rubrics. We show that the CROME augmentation strategy using rubrics from popular LLM APIs significantly outperforms standard baselines on RewardBench, improving average accuracy by up to 5.3% and achieving gains of up to 7.1% and 12.4% in reasoning and safety. The robustness of CROME is further testified by significant gains in DPO-aligned policies and Best-of-N alignment across various benchmarks, including AlpacaEval 2.0, RewardBench, safety-focused WildGuardTest, and the reasoning-specific GSM8k.

Rote learning is a memorization technique based on repetition. Many researchers argue that rote learning hinders generalization because it encourages verbatim memorization rather than deeper understanding. This concern extends even to factual knowledge, which inevitably requires a certain degree of memorization. In this work, we challenge this view and demonstrate that large language models (LLMs) can, in fact, generalize over rote memorized data. We introduce a two-phase “memorize-then-generalize” framework, where the model first rote memorizes factual subject-object associations using a synthetic semantically meaningless key token and then learns to generalize by fine-tuning on a small set of semantically meaningful prompts. Extensive experiments over 8 LLMs show that the models can reinterpret rote memorized data through the semantically meaningful prompts, as evidenced by the emergence of structured, semantically aligned latent representations between the key token and the semantically meaningful prompts. This surprising finding opens the door to both effective and efficient knowledge injection as well as possible risks of repurposing the memorized data for malicious usage.

Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) has proven effective for complex reasoning tasks with clear correctness signals such as math and coding. However, extending it to real-world reasoning tasks is challenging, as evaluation depends on nuanced, multi-criteria judgments rather than binary correctness. Instance-specific rubrics have recently been used in evaluation benchmarks to capture such judgments, but their potential as reward signals for on-policy post-training remains underexplored. We introduce $\textbf{Rubrics as Rewards (\textit{RaR})}$, an on-policy reinforcement learning method that extends RLVR beyond verifiable domains by using rubric-based feedback. Across both medical and science domains, we evaluate multiple strategies for aggregating rubric feedback into rewards. The best RaR variant achieves relative improvements of up to 31\% on HealthBench and 7\% on GPQA-Diamond over popular LLM-as-judge baselines that rely on direct Likert-based rewards. These results demonstrate that RaR-trained policies adapt well to diverse evaluation formats, performing strongly on both rubric-based and multiple-choice tasks. Moreover, we find that using rubrics as structured reward signals yields better alignment for smaller judges and reduces performance variance across judge scales.

In recent years, pre-trained large language models have achieved remarkable success across diverse tasks. Besides the pivotal role of self-supervised pre-training, their effectiveness in downstream applications also depends critically on the post-training process, which adapts models to task-specific data and objectives. However, this process inevitably introduces model shifts that can influence performance in different domains, and how such shifts transfer remains poorly understood. To open up the black box, we propose the SAE-based Transferability Score (STS), a new metric that leverages sparse autoencoders (SAEs) to forecast post-training transferability. Taking supervised fine-tuning as an example, STS identifies shifted dimensions in SAE representations and calculates their correlations with downstream domains, enabling reliable estimation of transferability \textit{before} fine-tuning. Extensive experiments across multiple models and domains show that STS accurately predicts the transferability of supervised fine-tuning, achieving Pearson correlation coefficients above 0.7 with actual performance changes. Beyond this, we take an initial step toward extending STS to reinforcement learning. We believe that STS can serve as an {\color{black} interpretable} tool for guiding post-training strategies in LLMs. Code is available at \url{https://github.com/PKU-ML/STS}.

Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT) on domain-specific datasets is a common approach to adapt Large Language Models (LLMs) to specialized tasks but is often believed to degrade their general capabilities. In this work, we revisit this trade-off and present both empirical and theoretical insights. First, we show that SFT does not always hurt: using a smaller learning rate can substantially mitigate general performance degradation while preserving comparable target-domain performance. We then provide a theoretical analysis that explains these phenomena and further motivates a new method, Token-Adaptive Loss Reweighting (TALR). Building on this, and recognizing that smaller learning rates alone do not fully eliminate general-performance degradation in all cases, we evaluate a range of strategies for reducing general capability loss, including L2 regularization, LoRA, model averaging, FLOW, and our proposed TALR. Experimental results demonstrate that while no method completely eliminates the trade-off, TALR consistently outperforms these baselines in balancing domain-specific gains and general capabilities. Finally, we distill our findings into practical guidelines for adapting LLMs to new domains: (i) using a small learning rate to achieve a favorable trade-off, and (ii) when a stronger balance is further desired, adopt TALR as an effective strategy.

Prompt quality plays a critical role in the performance of large language models (LLMs), motivating a growing body of work on prompt optimization. Most existing methods optimize prompts over a fixed dataset, assuming static input distributions and offering limited support for iterative improvement. We introduce SIPDO (Self-Improving Prompts through Data-Augmented Optimization), a closed-loop framework for prompt learning that integrates synthetic data generation into the optimization process. SIPDO couples a synthetic data generator with a prompt optimizer, where the generator produces new examples that reveal current prompt weaknesses and the optimizer incrementally refines the prompt in response. This feedback-driven loop enables systematic improvement of prompt performance without assuming access to external supervision or new tasks. Experiments across question answering and reasoning benchmarks show that SIPDO outperforms standard prompt tuning methods, highlighting the value of integrating data synthesis into prompt learning workflows.

Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) has recently catalyzed a wave of "MLLM-r1" approaches that bring RL to vision language models. Most representative paradigms begin with a cold start, typically employing supervised fine-tuning (SFT), to initialize the policy before RL. However, SFT-based cold start adopts the reasoning paradigm intertwined with task solution and output format, which may induce instruction-style overfitting, weakens out-of-distribution generalization, and ultimately affects downstream RL. We revisit the cold start along two views, its training method and data construction, and introduce the Generalization Factor (GF) coefficient to quantify the generalization capability under different methods. Our empirical study finds that preference–based training methods (e.g. DPO) generalizes better than SFT-based methods in cold start. Motivated by this, we propose $\textbf{SPECS}$—a $\textbf{S}$elf-distilled, $\textbf{P}$r$\textbf{e}$ference-based $\textbf{C}$old $\textbf{S}$tart framework that decouples multimodal learning: (1) generates introspective preference data pairs via self-distillation, avoiding reliance on larger teachers or manual annotation; (2) performs preference–based training to learn, focusing on shallow, transferable surface-form criteria (format, structure, style) rather than memorizing content; and (3) hands off to RLVR for deep reasoning results. Experimental results across multiple multimodal benchmarks show that our decoupling learning framework yields consistent performance gains over strong baselines, improving MEGA-Bench by 4.1\% and MathVista by 12.2\%. Additional experiments indicate that SPECS contributes to reducing in-distribution "stuckness," improving exploration, stabilizing training, and raising the performance ceiling. Project Page: https://kwen-chen.github.io/SPECS-VL/

Diffusion large language models (dLLMs) are emerging as an efficient alternative to autoregressive models due to their ability to decode multiple tokens in parallel. However, aligning dLLMs with human preferences or task-specific rewards via reinforcement learning (RL) is challenging because their intractable log-likelihood precludes the direct application of standard policy gradient methods. While prior work uses surrogates like the evidence lower bound (ELBO), these one-sided approximations can introduce significant policy gradient bias. To address this, we propose the Sandwiched Policy Gradient (SPG) that leverages both an upper and a lower bound of the true log-likelihood. Experiments show that SPG significantly outperforms baselines based on ELBO or one-step estimation. Specifically, SPG improves the accuracy over state-of-the-art RL methods for dLLMs by 3.6% on GSM8K, 2.6% on MATH500, 18.4% on Countdown, and 27.0% on Sudoku.

Information-based data selection for instruction tuning is compelling: maximizing the log-determinant of the Fisher information yields a monotone submodular objective, enabling greedy algorithms to achieve a $(1-1/e)$ approximation under a cardinality budget. In practice, however, we identify alleviating gradient conflicts, misalignment between per-sample gradients, is a key factor that slows down the decay of marginal log-determinant information gains, thereby preventing significant loss of information. We formalize this via an $\varepsilon$-decomposition that quantifies the deviation from ideal submodularity as a function of conflict statistics, yielding data-dependent approximation factors that tighten as conflicts diminish. Guided by this analysis, we propose SPICE, a conflict-aware selector that maximizes information while penalizing misalignment, and that supports early stopping and proxy models for efficiency. Empirically, SPICE selects subsets with higher log-determinant information than original criteria, and these informational gains translate into performance improvements: across 8 benchmarks with LLaMA2-7B and Qwen2-7B, SPICE uses only 10% of the data, yet matches or exceeds 6 methods including full-data tuning. This achieves performance improvements with substantially lower training cost. Code is available at https://github.com/Chang-pw/SPICE#.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown impressive capabilities in many scenarios, but their performance depends, in part, on the choice of prompt. Past research has focused on optimizing prompts specific to a task. However, much less attention has been given to optimizing the general instructions included in a prompt, known as a system prompt. To address this gap, we propose SPRIG, an edit-based genetic algorithm that iteratively constructs prompts from prespecified components to maximize the model's performance in general scenarios. We evaluate the performance of system prompts on a collection of 47 different types of tasks to ensure generalizability. Our study finds that a single optimized system prompt performs on par with task prompts optimized for each individual task. Moreover, combining system and task-level optimizations leads to further improvement, which showcases their complementary nature. Experiments also reveal that the optimized system prompts generalize effectively across model families, parameter sizes, and languages. This study provides insights into the role of system-level instructions in maximizing LLM potential.

Large language models (LLMs) have achieved remarkable progress in reasoning tasks, yet optimally integrating Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT) and Reinforcement Learning (RL) remains a fundamental challenge. Through a comprehensive analysis of token distributions, learning dynamics, and integration mechanisms from an entropy-based perspective, we reveal key differences between these paradigms: SFT induces coarse-grained, global shifts to policy distributions, while RL performs fine-grained, selective optimizations. Our analysis further establishes entropy as a critical indicator of training efficacy. Building on these observations, we introduce **S**upervised **R**einforcement **F**ine-**T**uning (**SRFT**), a single-stage framework that unifies both fine-tuning paradigms through entropy-aware weighting mechanisms. SRFT simultaneously applies SFT and RL to directly optimize LLMs using demonstrations and self-exploration rollouts rather than through two-stage sequential methods. Extensive experiments show that SRFT outperforms zero-RL baselines by **9.0%** on five mathematical reasoning benchmarks and by **10.9%** on three out-of-distribution benchmarks. Moreover, by leveraging demonstration data, SRFT maintains a more stable policy entropy, facilitating sustained policy improvement.

Language models often show little to no improvement (i.e., “saturation”) when trained via vanilla supervised fine-tuning (SFT) on data similar to what they saw in their training set (e.g., MATH). We introduce a new fine-tuning strategy, STAT, to train such a student model by using the metacognition ability of a stronger large language model (LLM) as the teacher. The teacher uses the task dataset to create a list of skills needed for the task, and then labels each data point with its required skills (Didolkar et al., 2024). By monitoring the student’s answers, the teacher creates a Missing-Skill-Profile for the student, tracking how often they failed to apply each skill in their responses. We use this idea to build a modified training set in one of two ways. In STAT-Sel, the teacher uses an existing set of training examples but adaptively reweights them according to the Missing-Skill-Profile. In STAT-Syn, the teacher synthesizes additional examples involving missing skills. Across extensive experiments on Llama and Qwen models, our methods yield improvements of up to 7.5% on MATH, whereas SFT provides only limited gains. Furthermore, STAT enhances performance on out-of-distribution benchmarks (e.g., AIME24/25, AMC23, etc.) by an average of 4.6%. Crucially, we find that STAT is complementary to RL via GRPO (Shao et al., 2024): after the model is improved using STAT to address skill gaps, GRPO continues to add further gains. We conclude that skill-targeted adaptive training should broadly improve current training pipelines.

Continual learning in large language models (LLMs) is prone to catastrophic forgetting, where adapting to new tasks significantly degrades performance on previously learned ones. Existing parameter-efficient methods often limit model expressivity or introduce new parameters per task, creating scalability issues. To address these limitations, we introduce **Orthogonal Subspace Fine-Tuning (OSFT)**, a novel parameter-efficient approach for continual learning. OSFT leverages adaptive singular value decomposition (SVD) to dynamically identify and preserve critical, high-rank parameter subspaces that encode prior knowledge. All updates for new tasks are constrained to be strictly orthogonal to these preserved subspaces, which minimizes interference while maintaining a fixed parameter count and avoiding the need to store task-specific gradients. We extensively evaluate OSFT on standard continual learning benchmarks using both encoder-decoder (T5-Large) and decoder-only (LLaMA-2 7B, Mistral-7B) models across diverse tasks. Empirically, our method achieves a state-of-the-art trade-off between learnability and knowledge retention, dominating the Pareto frontier, with **up to 7\% higher** average accuracy than recent baselines like O-LoRA, and **reduces forgetting to near-negligible levels**. It notably maintains the model's general linguistic capabilities, instruction-following, and safety throughout the learning process. OSFT provides a practical, theoretically grounded, and scalable solution that effectively balances model plasticity and knowledge retention for continual learning in LLMs. Code is available at https://github.com/Red-Hat-AI-Innovation-Team/mini_trainer.

The common approach to communicate a large language model's (LLM) uncertainty is to add a percentage number or a hedging word to its response. But is this all we can do? Instead of generating a single answer and then hedging it, an LLM that is fully transparent to the user needs to be able to reflect on its internal belief distribution and output a summary of all options it deems possible, and how likely they are. To test whether LLMs possess this capability, we develop the SelfReflect metric, an information-theoretic distance between a given summary and a distribution over answers. In interventional and human studies, we find that SelfReflect indicates even slight deviations, yielding a fine measure of faithfulness between a summary string and an LLM's actual internal distribution over answers. With SelfReflect, we make a resounding negative observation: modern LLMs are, across the board, incapable of revealing what they are uncertain about, neither through reasoning, nor chains-of-thoughts, nor explicit finetuning. However, we do find that LLMs are able to generate faithful summaries of their uncertainties if we help them by sampling multiple outputs and feeding them back into the context. This simple approach shines a light at the universal way of communicating LLM uncertainties whose future development the SelfReflect score enables. To support the development of this universal form of LLM uncertainties, we publish the code that implements our metric for arbitrary LLMs under https://github.com/apple/ml-selfreflect .

We revisit policy-gradient optimization for Large Language Models (LLMs) from a single-stream perspective. Prevailing group-based methods like GRPO reduce variance with on-the-fly baselines but suffer from critical flaws: frequent degenerate groups erase learning signals, and synchronization barriers hinder scalability. We introduce Single-stream Policy Optimization (SPO), which eliminates these issues by design. SPO replaces per-group baselines with a persistent, KL-adaptive value tracker and normalizes advantages globally across the batch, providing a stable, low-variance learning signal for every sample. Being group-free, SPO enables higher throughput and scales effectively in long-horizon or tool-integrated settings where generation times vary. Furthermore, the persistent value tracker naturally enables an adaptive curriculum via prioritized sampling. Experiments using Qwen3-8B show that SPO converges more smoothly and attains higher accuracy than GRPO, while eliminating computation wasted on degenerate groups. Ablation studies confirm that SPO's gains stem from its principled approach to baseline estimation and advantage normalization, offering a more robust and efficient path for LLM reasoning. Across five hard math benchmarks with Qwen3-8B, SPO improves the average maj@32 by $+3.4\ \text{percentage points} (\mathrm{pp})$ over GRPO, driven by substantial absolute point gains on challenging datasets, including $+7.3\ \mathrm{pp}$ on BRUMO 25, $+4.4\ \mathrm{pp}$ on AIME 25, $+3.3\ \mathrm{pp}$ on HMMT 25, and achieves consistent relative gain in pass@$k$ across the evaluated $k$ values. SPO's success challenges the prevailing trend of adding incidental complexity to RL algorithms, highlighting a path where fundamental principles, not architectural workarounds, drive the next wave of progress in LLM reasoning.

Reasoning models leveraging long chains of thought employ various cognitive skills, such as verification of their answers, backtracking, retrying by an alternate method, and more. Previous work has shown that when a base language model exhibits these skills, training that model further with reinforcement learning (RL) can learn to leverage them. How can we get models to leverage skills that aren't exhibited by base models? Our work, SkillFactory, is a method for fine-tuning models to roughly learn these skills during a supervised fine-tuning (SFT) stage prior to RL. Our approach does not rely on distillation from a stronger model, but instead uses samples from the model itself, rearranged to provide training data in the format of those skills. These "silver" SFT traces may be imperfect, but are nevertheless effective for priming a model to acquire skills during RL. Our evaluation shows that (1) starting from SkillFactory SFT initialization helps a model to generalize to harder variants of a task post-RL, despite lower performance pre-RL; (2) cognitive skills are indeed used by the model; (3) RLed SkillFactory models are more robust to regression on out-of-domain tasks than RLed base models. Our work suggests that inductive biases learned prior to RL help models learn robust cognitive skill use.

Large language model agents operate in partially observable, long-horizon settings where obtaining supervision remains a major bottleneck. We address this by utilizing a source of supervision overlooked in existing post-training methods: unintended yet successful goals embedded within agent rollouts. Specifically, we introduce Hindsight Supervised Learning (HSL), where an auxiliary LLM reviews each completed trajectory and relabels it with all of the natural-language goals the agent actually achieved. HSL then pairs the trajectory with its relabeled goals and uses these pairs for additional fine-tuning. To mitigate suboptimality in the relabeled data, we propose two learning techniques for HSL, irrelevant-action masking and sample reweighting. Our experiments show that HSL is flexible and compatible with existing post-training pipelines. It improves both SFT and DPO, with larger gains on long-horizon tasks with more diverse goal spaces. Moreover, HSL is sample-efficient: on ALFWorld, it surpasses baselines trained on the full dataset while using only one quarter of the ground-truth demonstrations.

Reinforcement Learning (RL) has demonstrated its potential to improve the reasoning ability of Large Language Models (LLMs), yet most existing Reinforcement Finetuning (RFT) methods are inherently *on-policy* RL, failing to reuse historical data and thus preventing efficient scaling. In this work, we explore the potential of *off-policy* RL to leverage historical data for rollout-efficient RFT. Specifically, we propose **Re**incarnating **Mix**-policy Proximal Policy Gradient (**ReMix**), which enables on-policy RFT methods to leverage off-policy data. ReMix consists of three major components: (1) Mix-policy proximal policy gradient with an increased Update-To-Data (UTD) ratio that utilizes the data from both current and past policies for efficient training; (2) KL-Convex policy constraint that combines the KL constraints on the base and precedent model to balance stability and flexibility; (3) Policy reincarnation that replaces the base model with the mix-policy RFT model in the mid way of training and restarts on-policy training, to achieve a seamless transition from early efficiency to steady convergence. In our experiments, we train a series of ReMix models based on PPO, GRPO from 1.5B, 7B base models. On five math reasoning benchmarks (i.e., AIME'24, AMC'23, Minerva, OlympiadBench, and MATH500), ReMix achieves an average Pass@1 accuracy of **52.10%** (with **0.079M rollouts**) and **64.39%** (with **0.011M rollouts**) on 1.5B and 7B models, respectively. Compared with 15 recent advanced models, ReMix shows SOTA-level performance with an over **30x to 450x reduction in training cost in terms of rollout data volume**, demonstrating superior training efficiency. Additionally, our multifaceted analysis reveals insightful findings, including the implicit preference for shorter responses of off-policy RFT, the collapse mode of self-reflection under severe off-policyness, etc. The code and the trained models are available at https://anitaleungxx.github.io/ReMix/ .

We introduce _String Seed of Thought (SSoT)_, a novel prompting method for LLMs that improves _Probabilistic Instruction Following (PIF)_. We define PIF as a task requiring an LLM to select its answer from a predefined set of options, each associated with a specific probability, such that the empirical distribution of the generated answers aligns with the target distribution when prompted multiple times. While LLMs excel at tasks with single, deterministic answers, they often fail at PIF, exhibiting biases problematic for applications requiring non-deterministic behaviors, such as human-behavior simulation, content diversification, and multiplayer games. It also harms the diversity of generated responses, a crucial factor in test-time scaling, by causing the outputs to collapse into a limited set of answers. To address this, we propose SSoT, a simple prompting method that instructs an LLM to first output a random string to generate sufficient entropy. SSoT also instructs the LLM to extract randomness by manipulating this string to derive a final answer, thereby preserving diversity while adhering to specific constraints. We demonstrate that SSoT significantly improves the PIF performance of LLMs, approaching the ideal performance of a pseudo-random number generator. Notably, our experiments on NoveltyBench show SSoT's benefits extend beyond closed-set tasks to open-ended tasks by enhancing response diversity.

Generating stylized large language model (LLM) responses via representation editing is a promising way for fine-grained output control. However, there exists an inherent trade-off: imposing a distinctive style often degrades truthfulness. Existing representation editing methods, by naively injecting style signals, overlook this collateral impact and frequently contaminate the model’s core truthfulness representations, resulting in reduced answer correctness. We term this phenomenon stylization-induced truthfulness collapse. We attribute this issue to latent coupling between style and truth directions in certain key attention heads, and propose \textbf{StyliTruth}, a mechanism that preserves stylization while keeping truthfulness intact. StyliTruth separates the style-relevant and truth-relevant subspaces in the model’s representation space via an orthogonal deflation process. This decomposition enables independent control of style and truth in their own subspaces, minimizing interference. By designing adaptive, token-level steering vectors within each subspace, we dynamically and precisely control the generation process to maintain both stylistic fidelity and truthfulness. We validate our method on multiple styles and languages. Extensive experiments and analyses show that StyliTruth significantly reduces stylization-induced truthfulness collapse and outperforms existing inference-time intervention methods in balancing style adherence with truthfulness.

The "end-to-end" label for LLMs is a misnomer. In practice, they depend on a non-differentiable decoding process that requires laborious, hand-tuning of hyperparameters like temperature and top-p. This paper introduces AutoDeco, a novel architecture that enables truly "end-to-end'' generation by learning to control its own decoding strategy. We augment the standard transformer with lightweight heads that, at each step, dynamically predict context-specific temperature and top-p values alongside the next-token logits. This approach transforms decoding into a parametric, token-level process, allowing the model to self-regulate its sampling strategy within a single forward pass. Through extensive experiments on eight benchmarks, we demonstrate that AutoDeco not only significantly outperforms common decoding strategies but also achieves performance comparable to an oracle-tuned baseline derived from "hacking the test set"—a practical upper bound for any static method. Besides, we demonstrate an emergent capability for instruction-based decoding control: the model learns to interpret natural language commands (e.g., ''generate with low randomness'') and adjusts its predicted temperature and top-p on a token-by-token basis, which may open a new paradigm for steerable and interactive LLM decoding.

Large Language Models typically rely on Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT) with Cross-Entropy (CE) loss to specialize in downstream tasks. However, CE forces the distribution toward one-hot targets and ignores alternative continuations, thereby limiting output diversity, a key drawback for generative applications that rely on sampling-based exploration. In this paper, we propose ``Training with Sparsemax$+$, Testing with Softmax (TS$^2$)''. Intuitively, sparsemax and its tailored loss mask the gradients of probabilities outside the support set, leaving excessive probability mass on irrelevant tail classes when evaluating with softmax. To address this issue, we propose an improved variant, Sparsemax$+$, for training, which augments the sparsemax loss with a suppression term that penalizes the out-of-support probabilities. At testing, we decode with softmax, yielding calibrated, non-degenerate probabilities where plausible near-ties survive. We fine-tuned Llama-3.1-8B and Qwen-2.5-7B with TS$^2$, achieving consistent improvements in accuracy and output diversity across chat, code, and open-domain benchmarks. Together, these results demonstrate that TS$^2$ provides a practical, drop-in solution for fine-tuning LLMs that are both more accurate and more creative. The code is available at https://github.com/xzy-bit/TS-2-ICLR-2026.

Temperature is a crucial hyperparameter in large language models (LLMs), controlling the trade-off between exploration and exploitation during text generation. High temperatures encourage diverse but noisy outputs, while low temperatures produce focused outputs but may cause premature convergence. Yet static or heuristic temperature schedules fail to adapt to the dynamic demands of reinforcement learning (RL) throughout training, often limiting policy improvement. We propose Temperature Adaptive Meta Policy Optimization (TAMPO), a new framework that recasts temperature control as a learnable meta-policy. TAMPO operates through a hierarchical two-loop process. In the inner loop, the LLM policy is updated (e.g., using GRPO) with trajectories sampled at the temperature selected by the meta-policy. In the outer loop, meta-policy updates the distribution over candidate temperatures by rewarding those that maximize the likelihood of high-advantage trajectories. This trajectory-guided, reward-driven mechanism enables online adaptation without additional rollouts, directly aligning exploration with policy improvement. On five mathematical reasoning benchmarks, TAMPO outperforms baselines using fixed or heuristic temperatures, establishing temperature as an effective learnable meta-policy for adaptive exploration in LLM reinforcement learning.

Aligning Large Language Models (LLMs) with human preferences through finetuning is resource-intensive, motivating lightweight alternatives at test time. We address test-time alignment through the lens of sequential decision making, a perspective that reveals two fundamental challenges. When actions are defined at the token level, as in guided decoding, alignment suffers from the curse of horizon. Conversely, when actions are at the response level, as in traditional iterative refinement, the curse of dimensionality emerges. To resolve this trade-off, we draw inspiration from Model Predictive Control (MPC) in control theory to propose Textual Model Predictive Control (TMPC), a novel predictive planning framework adapted for aligning LLMs at inference time. A key limitation of standard MPC is its reliance on predefined, hard segment boundaries, which are often absent in text generation. TMPC overcomes this by introducing two principles inspired by hierarchical reinforcement learning: (1) Hindsight Subgoal Identification, where TMPC analyzes generation subgoals to retrospectively identify high-reward intermediate outputs as subgoals. This allows the framework to discover meaningful, task-specific planning steps (e.g., a sentence in machine translation or a bug fix in code generation.). (2) Subgoal-Conditioned Re-Generation, where these identified subgoals are used to guide subsequent planning iterations. By conditioning on these proven, high-quality subgoals, TMPC ensures stable improvement by building upon previously validated successes. TMPC is evaluated on three tasks with distinct segmentation properties: discourse-level translation, long-form response generation, and program synthesis. The results demonstrate that TMPC consistently improves performance, highlighting the generality. Project page: https://rl-bandits-lab.github.io/TMPC/.

The objectives that Large Language Models (LLMs) implicitly optimize remain dangerously opaque, making trustworthy alignment and auditing a grand challenge. While Inverse Reinforcement Learning (IRL) can infer reward functions from behaviour, existing approaches either produce a single, overconfident reward estimate or fail to address the fundamental ambiguity of the task (non-identifiability). This paper introduces a principled auditing framework that re-frames reward inference from a simple estimation task to a comprehensive process for verification. Our framework leverages Bayesian IRL to not only recover a distribution over objectives but to enable three critical audit capabilities: (i) Quantifying and systematically reducing non-identifiability by demonstrating posterior contraction over sequential rounds of evidence; (ii) Providing actionable, uncertainty-aware diagnostics that expose spurious shortcuts and identify out-of-distribution prompts where the inferred objective cannot be trusted; and (iii) Validating policy-level utility by showing that the refined, low-uncertainty reward can be used directly in RLHF to achieve training dynamics and toxicity reductions comparable to the ground-truth alignment process. Empirically, our framework successfully audits a detoxified LLM and generalizes beyond detoxification to a helpfulness preference setting, yielding a well-calibrated and interpretable objective that strengthens alignment guarantees. Overall, this work provides a practical toolkit for auditors, safety teams, and regulators to verify what LLMs are truly trying to achieve, moving us toward more trustworthy and accountable AI.

A central paradox in fine-tuning Large Language Models (LLMs) with Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Reward (RLVR) is the frequent degradation of multi-attempt performance (Pass@k) despite improvements in single-attempt accuracy (Pass@1). This is often accompanied by catastrophic forgetting, where models lose previously acquired skills. Despite numerous proposed methods, the community's focus on the standard reverse KL-divergence has led to a surprising oversight: the potential of alternative f-divergences as a proactive solution has been largely unexamined. We argue that standard RLVR objectives—both those using the mode-seeking reverse KL-divergence and those forgoing a divergence term entirely—lack a crucial mechanism for knowledge retention. The reverse-KL actively accelerates this decay by narrowing the policy, while its absence provides no safeguard against the model drifting from its diverse knowledge base. We propose a fundamental shift in perspective: using the divergence term itself as the solution. Our framework, Diversity-Preserving Hybrid RL (DPH-RL), leverages mass-covering f-divergences (like forward-KL and JS-divergence) to function as a 'rehearsal mechanism'. By continuously referencing the initial policy, this approach forces the model to maintain broad solution coverage. Math and SQL generation experiments show that DPH-RL both improves in-domain Pass@1 and Pass@k scores and effectively prevents catastrophic forgetting on out-of-domain tasks. Additionally, DPH-RL is more training-efficient because it computes f-divergence using generator functions, requiring only sampling from the initial policy and no online reference model. Our work highlights a crucial, overlooked axis for improving RLVR, demonstrating that the proper selection of a divergence measure is a powerful tool for building more general and diverse reasoning models.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown promise in accelerating the scientific research pipeline. A key capability for this process is the ability to generate novel research ideas, and prior studies have found settings in which LLM-generated research ideas were judged as more novel than human-expert ideas. However, a good idea should not simply appear to be novel, it should also result in better research after being executed. To test whether AI-generated ideas lead to better research outcomes, we conduct an execution study by recruiting 43 expert researchers to execute randomly-assigned ideas, either written by experts or generated by an LLM. Each expert spent over 100 hours implementing the idea and wrote a 4-page short paper to document the experiments. All the executed projects are then reviewed blindly by expert NLP researchers. Comparing the review scores of the same ideas before and after execution, the scores of the LLM-generated ideas decrease significantly more than expert-written ideas on all evaluation metrics (novelty, excitement, effectiveness, and overall; p < 0.05), closing the gap between LLM and human ideas observed at the ideation stage. When comparing the aggregated review scores from the execution study, we even observe that for many metrics there is a flip in rankings where human ideas score higher than LLM ideas. This ideation-execution gap highlights the limitations of current LLMs in generating truly effective research ideas and the challenge of evaluating research ideas in the absence of execution outcomes.

Self-improvement is a significant techniques within the realm of large language model (LLM), aiming to enhance the LLM performance without relying on external data. Despite its significance, generally how LLM performances evolve during the self-improvement process remains underexplored. In this paper, we theoretically model the training dynamics of self-improvement via the concept of solver-verifier gap. This is inspired by the conjecture that the performance enhancement of self-improvement stems from the gap between LLM's solver capability and verifier capability. Based on the theoretical framework, we further show how to model the entire training trajectory. This framework allows quantifying the capability limit of self-improvement by fitting the theoretical model to the experiment results. We validate the effectiveness of the theoretical framework on various LLMs and datasets. Beyond self-improvement, we extend our analysis to investigate how external data influences these dynamics within the framework. Notably, we find that under limited external data regimes, such external data can be utilized at any stage without significantly affecting final performances, which accords with the empirical observations.

Large Language Models (LLMs) are widely applied in real world scenarios, yet fine-tuning them comes with significant computational and storage costs. Parameter-Efficient Fine-Tuning (PEFT) methods such as LoRA mitigate these costs; however, the adapted parameters are dependent on the base model and cannot be transferred across different backbones. One way to address this issue is through knowledge distillation, but its effectiveness inherently depends on training data. Recent work such as TransLoRA avoids this by generating synthetic data; nevertheless, this adds complexity since it requires training an additional discriminator model. In this paper, we propose TiTok, a new framework that enables effective LoRA Transplantation through Token-level knowledge transfer. Specifically, TiTok captures task-relevant information through a token-wise contrastive excess between a source model with and without LoRA. This excess highlights informative tokens and enables selective filtering of synthetic data, all without additional models or overhead. Through experiments on three benchmarks across multiple transfer settings, we demonstrate that TiTok is consistently effective, achieving average performance gains of +4–10% compared to baselines overall.

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to assist scientists across diverse workflows. A key challenge is generating high-quality figures from textual descriptions, often represented as TikZ programs that can be rendered as scientific images. Prior research has proposed a variety of datasets and modeling approaches for this task. However, existing datasets for Text-to-TikZ are too small and noisy to capture the complexity of TikZ, causing mismatches between text and rendered figures. Moreover, prior approaches rely solely on supervised fine-tuning (SFT), which does not expose the model to the rendered semantics of the figure, often resulting in errors such as looping, irrelevant content, and incorrect spatial relations. To address these issues, we construct DaTikZ-V4, a dataset more than four times larger and substantially higher in quality than DaTikZ-V3, enriched with LLM-generated figure descriptions. Using this dataset, we train TikZilla, a family of small open-source Qwen models (3B and 8B) with a two-stage pipeline of SFT followed by reinforcement learning (RL). For RL, we leverage an image encoder trained via inverse graphics to provide semantically faithful reward signals. Extensive human evaluations with over 1,000 judgments show that TikZilla improves by 1.5-2 points over its base models on a 5-point scale, surpasses GPT-4o by 0.5 points, and matches GPT-5 in the image-based evaluation, while operating at much smaller model sizes. Code, data, and models will be made available.

Large language models are typically controlled via prompts, which must be repeatedly re-processed for every new query and are difficult to reuse modularly. We introduce TokMem, a procedural memory framework that compiles each reusable task procedure into a single trainable memory token. Each token serves as both a procedure index and a generation control signal that steers generation, enabling targeted behaviors with constant-size overhead. TokMem keeps the backbone LLM frozen and stores procedural knowledge entirely in these dedicated units, so new procedures can be added continually without interfering with existing ones. We evaluate TokMem on two settings: atomic recall over 1,000 Super-Natural Instructions tasks and compositional recall on multi-step function-calling. Our results show that TokMem consistently outperforms retrieval-augmented prompting while avoiding repeated context overhead. Moreover, it matches or exceeds parameter-efficient fine-tuning with substantially fewer trainable parameters.

Tool-Integrated Reasoning (TIR) enables large language models (LLMs) to enhance their internal reasoning ability by integrating external tools. However, models with TIR often exhibit suboptimal behaviors, including insufficient tool calls, excessive tool calls, and overthinking after receiving tool call results. How to empower LLMs to perform TIR efficiently and accurately, while stabilizing the reasoning process, remains an open challenge. In this paper, we first analyze the impact of tool calls on model reasoning from the perspective of information entropy. We find that when tool call results are provided, the information entropy of subsequent reasoning content will show a clear trend of change, and the overall information entropy of the reasoning chain will vary depending on the number of tool calls. Based on these observations, we propose Tool-Light, a framework designed to encourage LLMs to perform TIR efficiently and accurately. Our framework consists of dataset construction and multi-stage fine-tuning. For dataset construction, we use the trained model for continuous self-evolved sampling, integrating two methods: vanilla sampling and entropy-guided sampling. At the same time, during the sampling process, we design strict criteria for selecting positive-negative pairs. For the training process, we introduce a two-stage method, which includes a Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT), and Self-Evolved Direct Preference Optimization (DPO). Test results on 10 datasets reveal the effectiveness of Tool-Light, significantly improving the efficiency and accuracy of the model in completing TIR tasks.

As artificial intelligence (AI) systems approach and surpass expert human performance across a broad range of tasks, obtaining high-quality human supervision for evaluation and training becomes increasingly challenging. Our focus is on tasks that require deep knowledge and skills of multiple domains, where this bottleneck is severe. Unfortunately, even the best human experts are knowledgeable only in a single narrow area, and will not be able to evaluate the correctness of advanced AI systems on such superhuman tasks. However, based on their narrow expertise, humans may provide a weak signal, i.e., a *complementary label* indicating an option that is incorrect. For example, a cardiologist could state that ''this is not related to any cardiovascular disease,'' even if they cannot identify the true disease. Based on this weak signal, we propose a scalable oversight framework that enables us to evaluate frontier AI systems without the need to prepare the ground truth. We derive an *unbiased* estimator of top-1 accuracy from complementary labels and quantify how many complementary labels are needed to match the variance of ordinary labels. We further introduce two estimators to combine scarce ordinary labels with abundant complementary labels. We provide finite-sample deviation guarantees for both complementary-only and the mixed estimators. Empirically, we show that we can evaluate the output of large language models without the ground truth, if we have complementary labels. We further show that we can train an AI system with such weak signals: we show how we can design an agentic AI system automatically that can improve itself with this partitioned human supervision. Our code is available at https://github.com/R-Yin-217/Towards-Scalable-Oversight-via-Partitioned-Human-Supervision.

Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated strong persuasive capabilities comparable to those of humans, offering promising benefits while raising societal concerns. However, systematically evaluating the persuasive capabilities of LLMs is inherently challenging, as the effectiveness of persuasion among humans varies significantly across different domains. In this paper, we take a theory-driven approach to provide a scalable and principled framework for studying the persuasive capabilities of LLMs. Grounded in Bayesian persuasion theory, we repurpose human-human persuasion datasets to construct environments for evaluating and training LLMs as strategic persuaders. Our results reveal that frontier models can consistently achieve high persuasion gains and exhibit sophisticated persuasion strategies that align with theoretical characterizations. Building on this, we use reinforcement learning to train LLMs for strategic persuasion in our environments. Our results also demonstrate that even small LLMs can obtain significantly higher persuasion gains through reinforcement learning.

Large language model (LLM) alignment is typically achieved through learning from human preference comparisons, making the quality of preference data critical to its success. Existing studies often pre-process raw training datasets to identify valuable preference pairs using external reward models or off-the-shelf LLMs, achieving improved overall performance but rarely examining whether individual, selected data point is genuinely beneficial. We assess data quality through individual influence on validation data using our newly proposed truncated influence function (TIF), which mitigates the over-scoring present in traditional measures and reveals that preference data quality is inherently a property of the model. In other words, a data pair that benefits one model may harm another. This leaves the need to improve the preference data selection approaches to be adapting to specific models. To this end, we introduce two candidate scoring functions (SFs) that are computationally simpler than TIF and positively correlated with it. They are also model dependent and can serve as potential indicators of individual data quality for preference data selection. Furthermore, we observe that these SFs inherently exhibit errors when compared to TIF. To this end, we combine them to offset their diverse error sources, resulting in a simple yet effective data selection rule that enables the models to achieve a more precise selection of valuable preference data. We conduct experiments across diverse alignment benchmarks and various LLM families, with results demonstrating that better alignment performance can be achieved using less data, showing the generality of our findings and new methods. Our code is publicly available at~\url{https://github.com/tmlr-group/TIF_LossDiff-IRM}.

As humans increasingly share environments with diverse agents powered by RL, LLMs, and beyond, the ability to explain agent policies in natural language is vital for reliable coexistence. We introduce a general-purpose framework that trains explanation-generating LLMs via reinforcement learning from AI feedback, with distributional rewards generated by generative continuous normalizing flows (CNFs). CNFs capture the pluralistic and probabilistic nature of human judgments about explanations. Moreover, under mild assumptions, CNFs provably bound deviations from true human reward distributions when trained on noisy proxy rewards from LLMs. We design a specialized CNF architecture that selectively attends to linguistic cues in decision context and explanations when generating rewards. Human and LLM evaluators find that our method delivers explanations that enable more accurate predictions of true agent decisions, exhibit greater logical soundness and actionability, and impose lower cognitive load than explanations trained with proxy LLM rewards or state-of-the-art RLHF and RLAIF baselines.

The adoption of Large Language Models (LLMs) as automated evaluators (LLM-as-a-judge) has revealed critical inconsistencies in current evaluation frameworks. We identify two fundamental types of inconsistencies: (1) \textit{Score-Comparison Inconsistency}, where lower-rated responses outperform higher-scored ones in pairwise comparisons, and (2) \textit{Pairwise Transitivity Inconsistency}, manifested through circular preference chains ($A\!>\!B\!>\!C\!>\!A$) and equivalence contradictions ($A\!=\!B\!=\!C\!\neq\!A$). We argue that these issues come from information loss in discrete rating systems and ambiguous tie judgments during pairwise evaluation. We propose \textbf{TrustJudge}, a probabilistic framework that addresses these limitations through two key innovations: 1) \textit{distribution-sensitive scoring} that computes continuous expectations from discrete rating probabilities, preserving information entropy for more precise scoring, and 2) \textit{likelihood-aware aggregation} that resolves transitivity violations using bidirectional preference probabilities or perplexity. We also formalize the theoretical limitations of current LLM-as-a-judge frameworks and demonstrate how TrustJudge’s components overcome them. When evaluated with Llama-3.1-70B-Instruct as judge using our dataset, TrustJudge reduces Score-Comparison inconsistency by 8.43\% (from 23.32\% to 14.89\%) and Pairwise Transitivity inconsistency by 10.82\% (from 15.22\% to 4.40\%), while maintaining higher evaluation accuracy. Our work provides the first systematic analysis of evaluation framework inconsistencies in LLM-as-a-judge paradigms, offering both theoretical insights and practical solutions for reliable automated assessment. The framework demonstrates consistent improvements across various model architectures and scales, enabling more trustworthy LLM evaluation without requiring additional training or human annotations.

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly expected to be culturally customisable and personally aligned for natural language understanding (NLU). However, existing methods, from supervised fine-tuning (SFT) to personalised RLHF and prompting, either require costly large-scale annotations or remain constrained by their pretraining distributions. Moreover, acquiring annotations that reflect subjective, diverse, and evolving user preferences is both expensive and labour-intensive. To address these limitations, we propose \textit{\textbf{H}eterogeneous-\textbf{C}onsistency \textbf{C}o-Alignment} (HCC), a training-free annotation paradigm that leverages two heterogeneous models: a knowledge-rich yet potentially overconfident LLM and a task-specialised lightweight model guided by a small user preference set. Together, they verify and co-align misaligned outputs over unlabelled corpora. For verification, HCC introduces the reference-free \textit{\textbf{C}onsistent}-\textit{\textbf{A}nd}-\textit{\textbf{I}nconsistent} (\textbf{CAI}) Ratio, an uncertainty signal derived from inter-model agreements (consistent samples) and disagreements (inconsistent samples) to determine whether refinement is necessary. For co-alignment, HCC employs a non-parametric, embedding-based preference assignment scheme to recalibrate inconsistent samples according to user preferences. Across eight NLU datasets and both open- and closed-source LLMs, HCC consistently improves annotation alignment and, in several tasks, enables \textit{Llama-3-8B} to surpass \textit{GPT-3.5/4o-mini} after co-alignment correction. Moreover, CAI strongly correlates with accuracy and tracks pre- and post-alignment gains, offering a reference-free signal for scaling preference-aligned annotation without ground-truth supervision.

Vision-Language Models (VLMs) often suffer from visual hallucinations -- generating things that are not consistent with visual inputs -- and language shortcuts, where they skip the visual part and just rely on text priors. These issues arise because most post-training methods for VLMs rely on simple verifiable answer matching and supervise only final outputs, leaving intermediate visual reasoning without explicit guidance. As a result, VLMs receive sparse visual signals and often learn to prioritize language-based reasoning over visual perception. To mitigate this, some existing methods add visual supervision using human annotations or distilled labels from external large models. However, human annotations are labor-intensive and costly, and external signals can introduce high latency cost. In this paper, we introduce Vision-SR1, a three-stage self-rewarding reinforcement learning method that improves visual reasoning without relying on external visual supervision. Vision-SR1 decomposes VLM reasoning into two components: visual reasoning and language reasoning, where the model is first prompted to produce self-contained visual descriptions sufficient to answer the question without referring back to the input image, before jointly optimizing both visual and language reasoning through our multi-reward loss objective. To validate this self-containment, the same VLM model is re-prompted to perform language reasoning using only the generated visual reasoning as input to compute visual reward. The final reward is computed through a decoupled reward-advantage framework, where visual reward and language reasoning reward each have their advantages, log probabilities, and KL divergence calculated separately. This decoupling enables more fine-grained reward computation by preventing the entanglement of heterogeneous reward signals. Our experiments show that Vision-SR1 improves visual reasoning, mitigates visual hallucinations, and reduces reliance on language shortcuts across diverse vision-language tasks, while being more efficient than methods that rely on external visual reward models, which require additional GPUs to host. In contrast, Vision-SR1 introduces no extra GPU overhead beyond that of standard training.

Visual instruction tuning (VIT) datasets have grown rapidly in scale, yet the informativeness of individual training samples has largely been overlooked. Recent dataset selection methods have shown that a small fraction of such datasets enriched with informative samples can lead to efficient finetuning of Multimodal Large Language Models. In this work, we explore the impact of sample complexity on informative data curation and introduce COMPACT (COMPositional Atomic-to-complex Visual Compositional Tuning), a visual compositional tuning data recipe that scales training sample complexity by combining multiple atomic visual capabilities in a single training example. Concretely, we synthesize rich and informative text questions for each image, allowing us to significantly reduce the number of training examples required for effective visual instruction tuning. COMPACT demonstrates superior data efficiency compared to existing data reduction methods. When applied to the LLAVA-665K VIT dataset, COMPACT reduces the data budget by 90% while still achieving 100.2% of the full VIT performance (compared to only 97.5% by the state-of-the-art method) across eight multimodal benchmarks. Further, training on the COMPACT data outperforms training on the full-scale VIT data on particularly complex benchmarks such as MM-Vet (+8.6%) and MMStar (+2.9%). COMPACT offers a scalable and efficient synthetic data generation recipe to improve on vision-language tasks.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have achieved remarkable success through imitation learning on vast text corpora, but this paradigm creates a training-generation gap and limits robust reasoning. Reinforcement learning (RL) offers a more data-efficient solution capable of bridging this gap, yet its application has been constrained by a critical data bottleneck: existing RL datasets are orders of magnitude smaller and less diverse than web-scale pre-training corpora. To address this, we introduce the \textbf{\texttt{Webscale-RL} pipeline}, a scalable data engine that systematically converts large-scale pre-training documents into millions of diverse, verifiable question-answer pairs for RL. Using this pipeline, we construct the \textbf{\texttt{Webscale-RL} dataset}, containing 1.2 million examples across more than 9 domains. Our experiments show that the model trained on this dataset significantly outperforms continual pretraining and strong data refinement baselines across a suite of benchmarks. Notably, RL training with our dataset proves substantially more efficient, achieving the performance of continual pre-training with up to 100$\times$ fewer tokens. Our work presents a viable path toward scaling RL to pre-training levels, enabling more capable and efficient language models.

While Large Language Models (LLMs) hold promise to become autonomous agents, they often explore suboptimally in sequential decision-making. Recent work has sought to enhance this capability via supervised fine-tuning (SFT) or reinforcement learning (RL), improving regret on the classic multi-armed bandit task. However, it remains unclear how these learning methods shape exploration strategies and how well they generalize. We investigate both paradigms by training LLMs with SFT on expert trajectories and RL with a range of tailored reward signals including a strategic, regret-shaped reward to reduce variance, and an algorithmic reward that enables oracle imitation. The resulting agents outperform pre-trained models and achieve performance comparable to Upper Confidence Bound (UCB) and Thompson Sampling, with robust generalization to 6$\times$ longer horizons and across bandit families. Behavioral analysis reveals that gains often stem from more sophisticated but greedier exploitation: RL/SFT agents are more prone to early catastrophic failure than pre-trained models, prematurely abandoning exploration. Furthermore, agents trained to imitate UCB learn to outperform their teacher by adopting more exploitative variants. Our findings clarify when each training paradigm is preferable and advocate tailored reward design and evaluation beyond average regret to promote robust exploratory behavior.

Preference alignment is an essential step in adapting large language models (LLMs) to human values, but existing approaches typically depend on costly human annotations or large-scale API-based models. We explore whether a weak LLM can instead act as an effective annotator. We surprisingly find that selecting only a subset of a weak LLM's highly confident samples leads to substantially better performance than using full human annotations. Building on this insight, we propose **C**onfidence-**W**eighted **P**reference **O**ptimization (CW-PO), a general framework that re-weights training samples by a weak LLM’s confidence and can be applied across different preference optimization objectives. Notably, the model aligned by CW-PO with just 20\% of human annotations outperforms the model trained with 100\% of annotations under standard DPO. These results suggest that weak LLMs, when paired with confidence weighting, can dramatically reduce the cost of preference alignment while even outperforming methods trained on fully human-labeled data.

Reasoning distillation, a cost-effective approach for enhancing student model performance, has attracted increasing attention. It typically leverages a large teacher model to generate reasoning paths, which are then used to fine-tune a student model so that it mimics the teacher's behavior in training contexts. However, previous approaches have lacked a detailed analysis of the origins of the distilled model's capabilities. It remains unclear whether the student can maintain consistent behaviors with the teacher in novel test-time contexts, or whether it regresses to its original output patterns, raising concerns about the generalization of distillation models. To analyse this question, we introduce a cross-model Reasoning Distillation Provenance Tracing framework. For each action (e.g., a sentence) produced by the distilled model, we obtain the predictive probabilities assigned by the teacher, the original student, and the distilled model under the same context. By comparing these probabilities, we classify each action into four categories: (i) teacher-originated actions, (ii) student-originated actions, (iii) pre-existing actions in both models not enhanced by distillation, and (iv) pre-existing actions boosted through distillation. By systematically disentangling the provenance of each action, we experimentally demonstrate that, in test-time contexts, the distilled model can indeed generate teacher-originated actions, which correlate with and plausibly explain observed performance on distilled model. Building on this analysis, we further propose a teacher-guided data selection method. Unlike prior approach that rely on heuristics (e.g., selecting data most aligned with the student's original distribution), our method directly compares teacher–student divergences on the training data, providing a principled selection criterion. We validate the effectiveness of our approach across multiple representative teacher models (Deepseek-R1-671B, QwQ-32B, GPT-OSS-120B) and diverse student models (Qwen2.5-7B-Instruct, Qwen4-4B-Base, Qwen3-8B-Base, Qwen3-4B-Instruct-2507). The results highlight the utility of our provenance-tracing framework and underscore its promise for reasoning distillation. We hope to share Reasoning Distillation Provenance Tracing, along with our insights into reasoning distillation, with the community.

Reward models are key to language model post-training and inference pipelines. Conveniently, recent work showed that every language model defines an implicit reward model (IM-RM), without requiring any architectural changes. However, such IM-RMs tend to generalize worse, especially out-of-distribution, compared to explicit reward models (EX-RMs) that apply a dedicated linear head over the hidden representations of a language model. The existence of a generalization gap is puzzling, as EX-RMs and IM-RMs are nearly identical. They can be trained using the same data, loss function, and language model, and differ only in how the reward is computed. Toward a fundamental understanding of the implicit biases underlying different reward model types, we investigate the root cause of this gap. Our main finding, backed by theory and experiments, is that IM-RMs rely more heavily on superficial token-level cues. Consequently, they often generalize worse than EX-RMs under token-level distribution shifts, as well as in-distribution. Furthermore, we provide evidence against alternative hypotheses for the generalization gap. Most notably, we challenge the claim that IM-RMs struggle in tasks where generation is harder than verification because they can operate both as a verifier and a generator. Overall, our results highlight that seemingly minor design choices can substantially impact the generalization behavior of reward models.

Vision-Language Models (VLMs) like CLIP have demonstrated remarkable generalization in zero- and few-shot settings, but adapting them efficiently to decentralized, heterogeneous data remains a challenge. While prompt tuning has emerged as a popular parameter-efficient approach in personalized federated learning, existing methods often sacrifice generalization in favor of personalization, struggling particularly on unseen classes or domains. In this work, we propose pFedMMA, the first personalized federated learning framework that leverages multi-modal adapters for vision-language tasks. Each adapter contains modality-specific up- and down-projection layers alongside a globally shared projection that aligns cross-modal features. Our optimization strategy allows clients to locally adapt to personalized data distributions while collaboratively training the shared projection to improve global generalization. This design is also communication-efficient, as only the shared component is exchanged during communication rounds. Through extensive experiments across eleven datasets, including domain- and label-shift scenarios, we show that pFedMMA achieves state-of-the-art trade-offs between personalization and generalization, outperforming recent federated prompt tuning methods.

Data quality plays a critical role in enhancing supervised fine-tuning (SFT) for large language models (LLMs), and token-level data selection has emerged as a promising direction for its fine-grained nature. Despite their strong empirical performance, existing token-level selection methods share two key limitations: (1) requiring training or accessing an additional reference model, and (2) relying solely on loss information for token selection, which cannot well preserve semantically important tokens that are not favored by loss-based metrics. To address these challenges, we propose **ssToken**, a **S**elf-modulated and **S**emantic-aware **Token** Selection approach. ssToken leverages readily accessible history models to compute the per-token loss difference with the current model, which serves as a self-modulated signal that enables the model to adaptively select tokens along its optimization trajectory, rather than relying on excess loss from an offline-trained reference model as in prior works. We further introduce a semantic-aware, attention-based token importance estimation metric, orthogonal to loss-based selection and providing complementary semantic information for more effective filtering. Extensive experiments across different model families and scales demonstrate that both self-modulated selection and semantic-aware selection alone outperform full-data fine-tuning, while their integration—ssToken—achieves synergistic gains and further surpasses prior token-level selection methods, delivering performance improvements while maintaining training efficiency. Source code is available at https://github.com/jianke0604/ssToken.

Scaling inference-time compute for Large Language Models (LLMs) has unlocked unprecedented reasoning capabilities. However, existing inference-time scaling methods typically rely on inefficient and suboptimal discrete search algorithms or trial-and-error prompting to improve the online policy. In this paper, we propose $\nabla$-Reasoner, an iterative generation framework that integrates differentiable optimization over token logits into the decoding loop to refine the policy on the fly. Our core component, Differentiable Textual Optimization (DTO), leverages gradient signals from both the LLM’s likelihood and a reward model to refine textual representations. $\nabla$-Reasoner further incorporates rejection sampling and acceleration design to robustify and speed up decoding. Theoretically, we show that performing inference-time gradient descent in the sample space to maximize reward is dual to aligning an LLM policy via KL-regularized reinforcement learning. Empirically, $\nabla$-Reasoner achieves over 20% accuracy improvement on a challenging mathematical reasoning benchmark, while reducing number of model calls by approximately 10-40% compared to strong baselines. Overall, our work introduces a paradigm shift from zeroth-order search to first-order optimization at test time, offering a cost-effective path to amplify LLM reasoning.

Although Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive formal reasoning abilities, they often break down when problems require complex proof planning. One promising approach for improving LLM reasoning abilities involves translating problems into formal logic and using a logic solver. Although off-the-shelf logic solvers are in principle substantially more efficient than LLMs at logical reasoning, they assume that all relevant facts are provided in a question and are unable to deal with missing commonsense relations. In this work, we propose a novel method that uses feedback from the logic solver to augment a logic problem with commonsense relations provided by the LLM, in an iterative manner. This involves a search procedure through potential commonsense assumptions to maximize the chance of finding useful facts while keeping cost tractable. On a collection of pure-logical reasoning datasets, from which some commonsense information has been removed, our method consistently achieves considerable improvements over existing techniques, demonstrating the value in balancing neural and symbolic elements when working in human contexts.

Multi-Hop Question Answering (MHQA) requires integrating dispersed, interdependent evidence through sequential reasoning under noise. This task is challenging for LLMs as they have a finite per-pass output capacity, beyond which the integration of task-relevant evidence proves unreliable. Consequently, the single-pass reasoning paradigm is inherently vulnerable to this capacity overflow. To formalize this bottleneck, our analysis establishes a Fano-style accuracy upper bound, defining a theoretical performance ceiling for single-pass LLMs. This bound reveals that accuracy inevitably collapses once task complexity exceeds model capacity, providing general principles for capacity-aware representation and structuring of MHQA in LLMs. Building on these principles, we introduce a proof-of-concept multi-call framework for MHQA, InfoQA. It ensures high per-step accuracy by combining capacity-aware task decomposition with active pruning of prior reasoning traces, keeping the information load within the single-pass limit. It further achieves robustness by a dependency-explicit workflow that enables precise control over the reasoning path. We construct a stringent and noise-rich benchmark to validate our theory and framework. Experimental results show that model behavior aligns with our predicted capacity curves while InfoQA achieves consistent performance improvements. We hope our work inspires more LLM multi-step reasoning methods: \faGithub \href{https://anonymous.4open.science/r/InfoQA-55D1}{InfoQA}.

While Long Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning significantly improves Large Language Models (LLMs) performance on complex reasoning tasks, the substantial computational and memory costs of generating long CoT sequences limit their efficiency and practicality. Existing studies usually enhance the reasoning efficiency of LLMs by compressing CoT sequences. However, this approach conflicts with test‑time scaling, limiting the reasoning capacity of LLMs. In this paper, we propose an efficient reasoning framework that models the reasoning process of LLMs as a state‑transition process. Specifically, we first apply a linear attention mechanism to estimate the LLM’s reasoning state, which records the historical reasoning information from previous reasoning steps. Then, based on the query prompt and the reasoning state, the LLM can efficiently perform the current reasoning step and update the state. With the linear attention, each token in the current reasoning step can directly retrieve relevant historical reasoning information from the reasoning state, without explicitly attending to tokens in previous reasoning steps. In this way, the computational complexity of attention is reduced from quadratic to linear, significantly improving the reasoning efficiency of LLMs. In addition, we propose a state-based reasoning strategy to mitigate the over-thinking issue caused by noisy reasoning steps. Extensive experiments across multiple datasets and model sizes demonstrate that our framework not only improves the reasoning efficiency of LLMs but also enhances their reasoning performance.

Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) test-time computing have introduced the capability to perform intermediate chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning (thinking) before generating answers. While increasing the thinking budget yields smooth performance improvements at inference time, the relationship between LLM capability, query complexity, and optimal budget allocation remains poorly understood for achieving compute-optimal inference. To address this challenge, we utilize $\textit{self-consistency}$, the agreement among multiple reasoning paths, as a proxy for thinking necessity. We first identify that lower self-consistency indicates when queries require extended thinking to reach correct answers. Building on this insight, we introduce $\texttt{Sonata}$ (Self-Consistency-Guided Adapter for Thinking Allocation), a lightweight approach that adaptively allocates thinking budgets to optimize the performance-efficiency tradeoff. $\texttt{Sonata}$ includes an adapter trained offline on a calibration dataset to predict self-consistency directly from the last layer hidden representations during the query prefilling stage. This prediction then guides on-the-fly budget allocation before thinking. The adapter is general, transferable across diverse tasks once trained, and introduces $<1$$\textperthousand$ computational overhead during inference. Notably, Sonata is compatible with existing CoT compression methods, enabling further efficiency gains when managing thinking budgets across queries. Extensive experiments on multiple models (Qwen3-8B, Qwen3-32B, GPT-OSS-120B, Qwen3-235B-A22B) and benchmarks~(AIME25, GSM8K, MATH500, GPQA, LiveCodeBench) demonstrate that $\texttt{Sonata}$ achieves $20\\%$ to $60\\%$ reduction in thinking tokens while maintaining the same accuracy, or up to $2\\%$ improvement in accuracy with the same token cost.

Reasoning LLMs (RLLMs) generate step-by-step chains of thought (CoTs) before giving an answer, which improves performance on complex tasks and makes reasoning transparent. But how robust are these reasoning traces to disruptions that occur within them? To address this question, we introduce a controlled evaluation framework that perturbs a model’s own CoT at fixed timesteps. We design seven interventions (benign, neutral, and adversarial) and apply them to multiple open-weight RLLMs across MATH, SCIENCE, and LOGIC tasks. Our results show that RLLMs are generally robust, reliably recovering from diverse perturbations, with robustness improving with model size and degrading when interventions occur early. However, robustness is not style-invariant: paraphrasing suppresses doubt-like expressions and reduces performance, while other interventions trigger doubt and support recovery. Recovery also carries a cost: neutral and adversarial noise can inflate CoT length by more than 200%, whereas paraphrasing shortens traces but harms accuracy. These findings provide new evidence on how RLLMs maintain reasoning integrity, identify doubt as a central recovery mechanism, and highlight trade-offs between robustness and efficiency that future training methods should address.

Large language models (LLMs) have exhibited strong instruction-following capabilities; however, they often struggle with compositional instructions involving multiple interleaved yet logically independent sub-tasks. These sub-tasks are typically organized in mutually exclusive structures, such as branching, chaining, or paralleling, where only one sub-task should be active at each generation step, while the others remain dormant. Despite their inactivity, dormant sub-tasks can inadvertently attract the model's attention due to structural entanglement within the input context or intermediate representations, leading to interference that compromises output fidelity. To address this challenge, we propose ATA, a structure-aware dynamic attention mechanism grounded in compositional structures, which dynamically identifies the active sub-task during generation while suppressing attention to inactive ones. By precisely steering the model’s focus, ATA mitigates interference and explicitly enhances model adherence to the active sub-task. Importantly, ATA operates within a single forward pass without requiring parameter updates. Extensive experiments show that ATA consistently enhances LLMs' instruction-following ability across various compositional structures, effectively mitigating attention distraction and demonstrating a strong generalization ability.

Interactive theorem provers (ITPs) require manual formalization, which is labor-intensive and demands expert knowledge. While automated formalization offers a potential solution, it faces two major challenges: model hallucination (e.g., undefined predicates, symbol misuse, and version incompatibility) and the semantic gap caused by ambiguous or missing premises in natural language descriptions. To address these issues, we propose CRAMF, a Concept-driven Retrieval-Augmented Mathematical Formalization framework. CRAMF enhances LLM-based autoformalization by retrieving formal definitions of core mathematical concepts, providing contextual grounding during code generation. However, applying retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) in this setting is non-trivial due to the lack of structured knowledge bases, the polymorphic nature of mathematical concepts, and the high precision required in formal retrieval. We introduce a framework for automatically constructing a concept-definition knowledge base from Mathlib4, the standard mathematical library for the Lean 4 theorem prover, indexing over 26,000 formal definitions and 1,000+ core mathematical concepts. To address conceptual polymorphism, we propose contextual query augmentation with domain- and application-level signals. In addition, we design a dual-channel hybrid retrieval strategy with reranking to ensure accurate and relevant definition retrieval. Experiments on miniF2F, ProofNet, and our newly proposed AdvancedMath benchmark show that CRAMF can be seamlessly integrated into LLM-based autoformalizers, yielding consistent improvements in translation accuracy—achieving up to 62.1% and an average of 29.9% relative improvement.

We study best-of-$N$ for large language models (LLMs) where the selection is based on majority voting. In particular, we analyze the limit $N \to \infty$, which we denote as best-of-$\infty$. While this approach achieves impressive performance in the limit, it requires an infinite test-time budget. To address this, we propose an adaptive generation scheme that selects $N$ based on answer agreement, thereby efficiently allocating inference-time computation. Beyond adaptivity, we extend the framework to weighted ensembles of multiple LLMs, showing that such mixtures can outperform any individual model. The optimal ensemble weighting is formulated and efficiently computed as a mixed-integer linear program. Extensive experiments demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach. Our code is available at https://github.com/jkomiyama/BoInf-code-publish/.

Large Language Models (LLMs) trained via Reinforcement Learning (RL) have exhibited strong reasoning capabilities and emergent reflective behaviors, such as rethinking and error correction, as a form of in-context exploration. However, the Markovian policy obtained from conventional RL training does not give rise to reflective exploration behaviors since the policy depends on the history only through the state and therefore has no incentive to enrich identical states with additional context. Instead, RL exploration is only useful during training to learn the optimal policy in a trial-and-error manner. Therefore, it remains unclear whether reflective reasoning will emerge during RL, or why it is beneficial. To remedy this, we recast reflective exploration within a Bayesian RL framework, which optimizes the expected return under a posterior distribution over Markov decision processes induced by the training data. This Bayesian formulation admits uncertainty-adaptive policies that, through belief updates, naturally incentivize information-gathering actions and induce self-reflection behaviors. Our resulting algorithm, BARL, instructs the LLM to stitch and switch strategies based on the observed outcomes, offering principled guidance on when and how the model should reflectively explore. Empirical results on both synthetic and mathematical reasoning tasks demonstrate that BARL outperforms conventional RL approaches, achieving superior test-time performance and token efficiency. Our code is available at https://github.com/shenao-zhang/BARL.

Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) is a powerful paradigm for enhancing the reasoning ability of Large Language Models (LLMs). Yet current RLVR methods often explore poorly, leading to premature convergence and entropy collapse. Moreover, they tend to produce poorly calibrated policies that remain confident in their generations regardless of correctness. To address this challenge, we introduce **Curiosity-Driven Exploration (CDE)**, a framework that leverages the model's intrinsic sense of curiosity to guide exploration. We formalize curiosity with signals from both the actor and the critic: for the actor, we use perplexity over its generated response, and for the critic, we use the variance of value estimates from a multi-head critic architecture. Both signals serve as an exploration bonus within the RLVR framework to guide the model. Our theoretical analysis shows that the actor-wise bonus inherently penalizes overconfident errors and promotes diversity among correct responses; moreover, we connect the critic-wise bonus to the well-established count-based exploration bonus in RL. Empirically, our method achieves an approximate **+3** point improvement over standard RLVR using GRPO/PPO on AIME benchmarks.

Large language models (LLMs) often solve challenging math exercises yet fail to apply the concept right when the problem requires genuine understanding. Popular Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) pipelines reinforce final answers but provide little fine-grained conceptual signal, so models improve at pattern reuse rather than conceptual applications. We introduce $\textit{CORE}$ (Concept-Oriented REinforcement), an RL training framework that turns explicit concepts into a controllable supervision signal. Starting from a high-quality, low-contamination textbook resource that links verifiable exercises to concise concept descriptions, we run a sanity probe showing LLMs can restate definitions but fail concept-linked quizzes, quantifying the conceptual reasoning gap. $\textit{CORE}$ then (i) synthesizes concept-aligned quizzes, (ii) injects brief concept snippets during rollouts to elicit concept-primed trajectories, and (iii) reinforces conceptual reasoning via trajectory replacement after group failures, a lightweight forward-KL constraint that aligns unguided with concept-primed policies, or standard GRPO directly on concept-aligned quizzes. Across several models, $\textit{CORE}$ delivers consistent gains over vanilla and SFT baselines on both in-domain concept--exercise suites and diverse out-of-domain math benchmarks. $\textit{CORE}$ unifies direct training on concept-aligned quizzes and concept-injected rollouts under outcome regularization. It provides fine-grained conceptual supervision that bridges problem-solving competence and genuine conceptual reasoning, while remaining algorithm- and verifier-agnostic.

Increasing test-time computation is a straightforward approach to enhancing the quality of responses in Large Language Models (LLMs). While Best-of-N sampling and Self-Consistency with majority voting are simple and effective, they require a fixed number of sampling responses for each query, regardless of its complexity. This could result in wasted computation for simpler questions and insufficient exploration for more challenging ones. In this work, we argue that model confidence of responses can be used for improving the efficiency of test-time scaling. Unfortunately, LLMs are known to be overconfident and provide unreliable confidence estimation. To address this limitation, we introduce Self-Calibration by distilling Self-Consistency-derived confidence into the model itself. This enables reliable confidence estimation at test time with one forward pass. We then design Calibrated Test-Time Scaling (CaTS), adapting common repeated sampling methods, such as self-consistency and Best-of-N to handle queries of various difficulty. We also show that CaTS-SC is provably better than vanilla self-consistency. Experiments on three LLMs across nine datasets demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach. Specifically, applying confidence-based Early Stopping (CaTS-ES) to Best-of-N improves MathQA accuracy from 73.7 to 83.6 with a sample budget of 16 responses, demonstrating the effectiveness of the confidence-based sampling strategy at inference time.

Large language models, constrained by the fixed-depth Transformer architecture, struggle to solve complex reasoning tasks in an end-to-end manner. Existing approaches, such as Chain of Thought, improve reasoning depth to some extent but rely heavily on natural language generation, with computational costs increasing rapidly as the length of the generated sequence grows. To address these limitations, we propose ChainGPT, a dual-reasoning model that shifts reasoning into latent computational space. Within each layer, ChainGPT employs multi-substep state updates combined with state-guided sparse attention, enabling deep local computation and efficient long-range modeling without quadratic costs. Across layers, recurrent depth approach iteratively refine latent states, supported by adaptive training and stopping strategies that balance reasoning depth against computational budget. Theoretically, we show that ChainGPT can, in principle, simulate general computation, and empirically it delivers consistent improvements over comparable models, including on reasoning tasks that remain challenging for existing systems. By unifying efficiency and reasoning ability, ChainGPT provides a principled foundation for next-generation language models.

While reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) is effective to improve the reasoning ability of large language models (LLMs), its reliance on human-annotated labels leads to the scaling up dilemma, especially for complex tasks. Recent self-rewarding methods investigate a label-free alternative to unlock the reasoning capabilities of LLMs, yet they frequently encounter the non-negligible training collapse issue, as the single-view supervision signal easily forms the self-consistent illusion, yielding the reward hacking. Inspired by the success of self-supervised learning, we propose \textit{Co-rewarding}, a novel self-supervised RL framework that improves training stability by seeking complementary supervision from another views. Specifically, we instantiate Co-rewarding in two ways: (1) \textit{Co-rewarding-I} is a data-side instantiation that derives reward signals from contrastive agreement across semantically analogous questions; and (2) \textit{Co-rewarding-II} is a model-side instantiation that maintains a slowly-updated reference teacher with pseudo labels to realize self-distillation. Intuitively, such instantiations introduce different levels of discrepancy to increase the difficulty of training collapse on trivial reasoning solutions. We also explore their orthogonally combined version to further boost the performance. Empirically, Co-rewarding exhibits stable training across various setups, and outperforms other self-rewarding baselines by $+3.31\%$ improvements on average on multiple mathematical reasoning benchmarks, especially by $+7.49\%$ on Llama-3.2-3B-Instruct. Notably, Co-rewarding reaches or even surpasses RLVR with ground-truth (GT) label in several cases, such as a Pass@$1$ of $94.01\%$ on GSM8K with Qwen3-8B-Base remarkably higher than GT. Our code is released at~\url{https://github.com/tmlr-group/Co-rewarding}.

While chain-of-thought (CoT) distillation from advanced large language models (LLMs) has proven effective in general reasoning tasks, it struggles in scientific domains where even advanced models often produce incorrect or superficial reasoning due to high complexity and specialized knowledge requirements. Directly distilling from such flawed outputs results in low-quality training data and limits the performance of smaller student models. To overcome this, we propose CoT-Evo, an evolutionary CoT distillation framework. It begins by constructing a diverse pool of reasoning trajectories from multiple LLM thinkers, enriches them with automatically retrieved domain knowledge, and iteratively refines the trajectories using novelty-driven selection, reflective recombination and mutation. The refinement is guided by a fitness function that evaluates answer correctness, coherence, and effective knowledge utilization. This results in a high-quality CoT dataset tailored for scientific reasoning. We employ this evolved dataset to fine-tune a compact model, which achieves state-of-the-art performance on scientific reasoning benchmarks. Our work establishes a scalable approach to synthesizing high-fidelity scientific reasoning data from diverse and fallible LLMs.

Process reward models (PRMs) have demonstrated significant efficacy in enhancing the mathematical reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs) by leveraging test-time scaling (TTS). However, while most PRMs exhibit substantial gains in mathematical domains, the scarcity of domain-specific training data and knowledge-based learning patterns limits their generalization ability when faced with other domains. To address this limitation, we shift the learning objective from verifying domain-specific knowledge to modeling domain-agnostic logical flow. Centering on \textit{contextual coherence} between chain-of-thought (CoT) steps, our approach is realized through a novel data annotation and training framework, which enhances the model's generalization capabilities across diverse domains. For instance, our resulting model, \textbf{ContextPRM}, achieves a notable 6.5\% average accuracy improvement over the majority voting baseline via weighted majority voting across nine non-mathematical domains in MMLU-Pro, including law, history, and philosophy, significantly surpassing the 2.2\% improvement from VersaPRM and 0.5\% gains from other mathematics-focused PRMs, demonstrating consistent performance across both mathematical and non-mathematical domains.

Modern language models generate chain-of-thought traces by autoregressively sampling tokens from a finite vocabulary. While this discrete sampling has achieved remarkable success, conducting chain-of-thought with continuously-valued tokens (CoT2) offers a richer and more expressive alternative. Our work provides new theoretical guarantees and algorithms for CoT2, motivated by logical reasoning tasks that inherently require search capabilities. Theoretically, we establish how CoT2 facilitates the model to track multiple discrete traces in parallel; and quantify the level of achievable parallelism and its benefits for inference efficiency. We also provide a CoT2-based one-layer transformer construction that solves the combinatorial ``subset sum problem'' given a sufficient embedding dimension. These insights arise from a novel and effective supervision strategy where we match the language model outputs to the empirical token distributions of a set of target traces. Complementing this, we introduce sampling strategies that unlock policy optimization methods for CoT2. Our primary strategy samples and composes $K$ discrete tokens at each decoding step to control the level of parallelism. Experiments confirm that (i) the optimal level of parallelism is governed by the embedding dimension, (ii) our continuous supervision strategy can outperform alternative methods, and (iii) policy optimization with CoT2 indeed improves the performance of the model beyond its initial discrete or continuous supervision.

Reinforcement Learning (RL) has become a compelling way to strengthen the multi step reasoning ability of Large Language Models (LLMs). However, prevalent RL paradigms still lean on sparse outcome-based rewards and limited exploration, which often drives LLMs toward repetitive and suboptimal reasoning patterns. In this paper, we study the central question of how to design exploration for LLM reasoning and introduce MERCI (Motivating Exploration in LLM Reasoning with Count-based Intrinsic Rewards), a novel RL algorithm that augments policy optimization with a principled intrinsic reward. Building on the idea of count-based exploration, MERCI leverages a lightweight Coin Flipping Network (CFN) to estimate the pseudo count and further epistemic uncertainty over reasoning trajectories, and converts them into an intrinsic reward that values novelty while preserving the learning signal from task rewards. We integrate MERCI into some advanced RL frameworks like Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO). Experiments on complex reasoning benchmarks demonstrate that MERCI encourages richer and more varied chains of thought, significantly improves performance over strong baselines, and helps the policy escape local routines to discover better solutions. It indicates that our targeted intrinsic motivation can make exploration reliable for language model reasoning.

While Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) has advanced knowledge-intensive tasks, we identify a fundamental vulnerability: the Correlation Trap. Existing systems cannot distinguish causally decisive evidence from overwhelmingly correlated yet misleading information, leading to systematic failures. We introduce Counterfactual RAG (CF-RAG), a new framework that operationalizes causal reasoning to overcome this limitation. CF-RAG systematically generates and evaluates counterfactual queries to identify causally relevant distinctions, and employs a parallel arbitration mechanism to reconcile conflicting evidence without interference. On challenging benchmarks, CF-RAG substantially improves robustness against the Correlation Trap, achieving state-of-the-art performance while maintaining comparable efficiency to standard RAG models.

We aim to improve the reasoning capabilities of language models via reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR). Recent RLVR post-trained models like DeepSeek-R1 have demonstrated reasoning abilities on mathematical and coding tasks. However, prior studies suggest that using RLVR alone to improve reasoning on inherently difficult tasks is less effective due to sparse rewards. Here, we draw inspiration from curriculum learning and propose to schedule tasks from easy to hard (E2H), allowing LLMs to build reasoning skills gradually. Our method is termed E2H Reasoner. Empirically, we observe that, although easy tasks are important initially, fading them out through appropriate scheduling is essential in preventing overfitting. Theoretically, we establish convergence guarantees for E2H Reasoner within an approximate policy iteration framework. We derive finite-sample complexity bounds and show that when tasks are appropriately decomposed and conditioned, learning through curriculum stages requires fewer total samples than direct learning. Experiments across diverse datasets and models demonstrate that E2H Reasoner substantially enhances LLM reasoning. Code is available at - https://github.com/divelab/E2H-Reasoning

Large reasoning models (LRMs), such as OpenAI’s o1 and DeepSeek-R1, harness test-time scaling to perform multi-step reasoning for complex problem-solving. This reasoning process, executed before producing final answers, is often guided by special juncture tokens that prompt self-evaluative reflection. These transition markers and reflective cues are referred to as “reflection tokens” (e.g., “wait”, “but”, “alternatively”). In this work, we treat reflection tokens as a “resource” and introduce the problem of resource allocation, aimed at improving the test-time compute performance of LRMs by adaptively regulating the frequency and placement of reflection tokens. Through empirical analysis, we show that both excessive and insufficient use of reflection tokens, referred to as over-reflection and under-reflection, can degrade model performance. To better understand this trade-off, we draw an analogy between reflection token usage and learning rate scheduling in optimization. Building on this insight, We propose cyclical reflection token scheduling (termed CyclicReflex), a training-free decoding strategy that dynamically modulates reflection token logits with a bidirectional, position-dependent triangular waveform, incurring no additional computation cost. Experiments on MATH500, AIME2024/2025, AMC2023, GPQA Diamond and LiveCodeBench demonstrate that CyclicReflex consistently improves performance across model sizes (1.5B–14B), outperforming standard decoding and recent approaches such as TIP (thought switching penalty) and S1.

Large Language Models (LLMs) demonstrate strong performance on mathematical problems when prompted with Chain-of-Thought (CoT), yet it remains unclear whether this success stems from search, rote procedures, or rule-consistent reasoning. To address this, we propose modeling CoT as a certain rule-based stochastic process over directed acyclic graphs (DAGs), where nodes represent intermediate derivation states and edges encode rule applications. Within this framework, we introduce \textbf{logical closeness}, a metric that quantifies how well a model’s CoT trajectory (i.e., the LLM's final output) adheres to the DAG structure, providing evaluation beyond classical PASS@$k$ metrics. Building on this, we introduce the \emph{DAG-MATH} CoT format and construct a benchmark that guides LLMs to generate CoT trajectories in this format, thereby enabling the evaluation of their reasoning ability under our framework. Across standard math reasoning datasets, our analysis uncovers statistically significant differences in reasoning fidelity among representative LLM families-even when PASS@$k$ is comparable-highlighting gaps between final-answer accuracy and rule-consistent derivation. Our framework provides a balance between free-form CoT and formal proofs systems, offering actionable diagnostics for LLMs reasoning evaluation. Our benchmark and code are available at https://github.com/YuanheZ/DAG-MATH.

Reinforcement learning (RL) with group relative policy optimization (GRPO) has become a widely adopted approach for enhancing the reasoning capabilities of multimodal large language models (MLLMs). While GRPO enables long-chain reasoning without a traditional critic model, it often suffers from sparse rewards, arising from the scarcity of positive feedback on difficult problems, and from advantage vanishing, which occurs when group-level rewards exhibit high consistency for problems that are too easy or too hard. Existing solutions fall into three categories: sample enhancement and expansion, which may aggravate vanishing advantage due to poor control of difficulty distribution; selective sample utilization, which fails to fully leverage the value of all data; and indirect reward design, which may introduce biased optimization directions due to misalignment between reasoning and the final outcome. However, these approaches overlook a fundamental question: for a given problem, how can we ensure that the within-group reward distribution of responses exhibits enough variance to yield clear optimization signals for each response? To address these issues, we propose DIVA-GRPO, a difficulty-adaptive variant augmentation advantage method that dynamically adjusts the difficulty distribution of variants for each problem from a global perspective. Our method dynamically assesses problem difficulty, samples variants with appropriate difficulty levels, and advantages are computed within both local and global(a problem and its variants) groups using difficulty-weighted and normalized scaling. This design alleviates reward sparsity and advantage vanishing, minimizes data waste, and improves training stability. Extensive experiments on six reasoning benchmarks demonstrate that DIVA-GRPO outperforms existing approaches in both training efficiency and reasoning performance.

Recent large reasoning models (LRMs) driven by reinforcement learning algorithms (e.g., GRPO) have achieved remarkable performance on challenging reasoning tasks. However, these models suffer from overthinking, generating unnecessarily long and redundant reasoning even for simple questions, which substantially increases computational cost and response latency. While existing methods incorporate length rewards to GRPO to promote concise reasoning, they incur significant performance degradation. We identify the root cause: when rewards for correct but long rollouts are penalized, GRPO's group-relative advantage function can assign them negative advantages, actively discouraging valid reasoning. To overcome this, we propose Decoupled Reward Policy Optimization (DRPO), a novel framework that decouples the length-based learning signal of correct rollouts from incorrect ones. DRPO ensures that reward signals for correct rollouts are normalized solely within the positive group, shielding them from interference by negative samples. The DRPO's objective is grounded in integrating an optimized positive data distribution, which maximizes length-based rewards under a KL regularization, into a discriminative objective. We derive a closed-form solution for this distribution, enabling efficient computation of the objective and its gradients using only on-policy data and importance weighting. Of independent interest, this formulation is general and can incorporate other preference rewards of positive data beyond length. Experiments on mathematical reasoning tasks demonstrate DRPO's significant superiority over six efficient reasoning baselines. Notably, with a 1.5B model, our method achieves 77\% length reduction with only 1.1\% performance loss on simple questions like GSM8k dataset, while the follow-up baseline sacrifices 4.3\% for 68\% length reduction.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown remarkable reasoning capabilities, while their practical applications are limited by severe factual hallucinations due to limitations in the timeliness, accuracy, and comprehensiveness of their parametric knowledge. Meanwhile, enhancing retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) with reasoning remains challenging due to ineffective task decomposition and redundant retrieval, which can introduce noise and degrade response quality. In this paper, we propose DeepRAG, a framework that models retrieval-augmented reasoning as a Markov Decision Process (MDP), enabling reasonable and adaptive retrieval. By iteratively decomposing queries, DeepRAG dynamically determines whether to retrieve external knowledge or rely on parametric reasoning at each step. Experiments show that DeepRAG improves retrieval efficiency and boosts answer accuracy by 25.41%, demonstrating its effectiveness in enhancing retrieval-augmented reasoning.

Although Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) has become an essential component for developing advanced reasoning skills in language models, contemporary studies have documented training plateaus after thousands of optimization steps, i.e., notable decreases in performance gains despite increased computational investment. This limitation stems from the sparse exploration patterns inherent in current RLVR practices, where models rely on limited rollouts that often miss critical reasoning paths and fail to provide systematic coverage of the solution space. We present DeepSearch, a framework that integrates Monte Carlo Tree Search (MCTS) directly into RLVR training. In contrast to existing methods that rely on tree search only at inference, DeepSearch embeds structured search into the training loop, enabling systematic exploration and fine-grained credit assignment across reasoning steps. Through training-time exploration, DeepSearch addresses the fundamental bottleneck of insufficient exploration, which leads to diminishing performance gains over prolonged training. Our contributions include: (1) a global frontier selection strategy that prioritizes promising nodes across the search tree, (2) selection with entropy-based guidance that identifies confident paths for supervision, and (3) adaptive replay buffer training with solution caching for efficiency. Experiments on mathematical reasoning benchmarks show that DeepSearch achieves an average accuracy of 62.95% and establishes a new state-of-the-art reasoning model, while using 5.7x fewer GPU hours than extended training approaches. These results highlight the importance of strategic exploration over brute-force scaling and demonstrate the promise of algorithmic innovation for advancing RLVR methodologies. DeepSearch establishes a new direction for scaling reasoning capabilities through systematic search rather than prolonged computation.

Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) has emerged as a crucial paradigm for incentivizing reasoning capabilities in Large Language Models (LLMs). Due to vast state-action spaces and reward sparsity in reasoning tasks, existing methods often struggle with deficient exploration and poor sample efficiency. In the paper, we propose **DIVER** (**D**iversity-**I**ncentivized Exploration for **V**ersatil**E** **R**easoning), an innovative framework that highlights the pivotal role of global sequence-level diversity to incentivize deep exploration for versatile reasoning. We first conduct a primary empirical study to reveal a strong positive correlation between global diversity and reasoning capacity. Building on this insight, we introduce global diversity incentives as an intrinsic reward to promote deep exploration in a semantically structured space. Incorporating the intrinsic reward, we develop a potential-based reward shaping mechanism to preserve optimal policy invariance and design simple heuristics to mitigate possible reward hacking. Experimental results show that DIVER outperforms competitive RLVR baselines with various exploration strategies on both in-domain and out-of-domain tasks, excelling in both Pass@1 and Pass@k evaluations. Our code is available at https://github.com/NJU-RL/DIVER.

Pass@$k$ is widely used to report performance for LLM reasoning, but it often yields unstable, misleading rankings, especially when the number of trials (samples) is limited and compute is constrained. We present a principled Bayesian evaluation framework that replaces Pass@$k$ and average accuracy over $N$ trials (avg@$N$) with posterior estimates of a model's underlying success probability and credible intervals, yielding stable rankings and a transparent decision rule for differences. Evaluation outcomes are modeled as categorical (not just 0/1) with a Dirichlet prior, giving closed-form expressions for the posterior mean and uncertainty of any weighted rubric and enabling the use of prior evidence when appropriate. Theoretically, under a uniform prior, the Bayesian posterior mean is order-equivalent to average accuracy (Pass@$1$), explaining its empirical robustness while adding principled uncertainty. Empirically, in simulations with known ground-truth success rates and on AIME'24/'25, HMMT, and BrUMO, the Bayesian/avg procedure achieves faster convergence and greater rank stability than Pass@$k$ and recent variants, enabling reliable comparisons at far smaller sample counts. The framework clarifies when observed gaps are statistically meaningful (non-overlapping credible intervals) versus noise, and it naturally extends to graded, rubric-based evaluations. Together, these results recommend replacing Pass@$k$ for LLM evaluation and ranking with a posterior-based, compute-efficient protocol that unifies binary and non-binary evaluation while making uncertainty explicit. Source code is available at https://github.com/mohsenhariri/scorio.

Test-time compute allocation in large reasoning models (LRMs) is widely used and has applications in mathematical problem solving, code synthesis, and planning. Recent work has addressed this problem by scaling self-consistency and parallel thinking, adding generic thinking tokens and prompting models to re-read the question before answering. Unfortunately, these approaches either inject task-agnostic tokens or mandate heuristics that do not explain---and often ignore---the \emph{spontaneous} repetition that many LRMs exhibit at the head of their internal chains. In contrast, we analyze and harness the model's tendency to restate the question, which we term the \emph{Echo of Prompt (EOP)}, as a front-loaded, compute-shaping mechanism. We formalize its probabilistic cost by casting echo removal as rejection-based conditioning and defining the \emph{Echo Likelihood Gap} $\Delta\mathcal{L}$ as a computable proxy. This provides the missing theoretical link that links early repetition to likelihood gains and downstream accuracy. However, it does not by itself specify how to exploit EOP. Consequently, we develop \emph{Echo-Distilled SFT (ED-SFT)} to instill an ``echo-then-reason'' pattern through supervised finetuning, and \emph{Echoic Prompting (EP)} to re-ground the model mid-trace without training. While promising, quantifying benefits beyond verbosity is non-trivial. Therefore, we conduct length and suffix-controlled likelihood analyses together with layer-wise attention studies, showing that EOP increases answer to answer-prefix attention in middle layers, consistent with an \emph{attention refocusing} mechanism. We evaluate under identical decoding settings and compute budgets on GSM8K, MathQA, Hendrycks-MATH, AIME24, and MATH-500 under identical decoding settings and budgets, and find consistent gains over baselines.

Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) have shown remarkable reasoning capabilities, yet they often suffer from overthinking, expending redundant computational steps on simple problems, or underthinking, failing to explore sufficient reasoning paths despite inherent capabilities. These issues lead to inefficiencies and potential inaccuracies, limiting practical deployment in resource-constrained settings. Existing methods to mitigate overthinking, such as suppressing reflective keywords or adjusting reasoning length, may inadvertently induce underthinking, compromising accuracy. Therefore, we propose \textsc{ReBalance}, a training-free framework that achieves efficient reasoning with balanced thinking. \textsc{ReBalance} leverages confidence as a continuous indicator of reasoning dynamics, identifying overthinking through high confidence variance and underthinking via consistent overconfidence. By aggregating hidden states from a small-scale dataset into reasoning mode prototypes, we compute a steering vector to guide LRMs’ reasoning trajectories. A dynamic control function modulates this vector’s strength and direction based on real-time confidence, pruning redundancy during overthinking, and promoting exploration during underthinking. Extensive experiments conducted on four models ranging from 0.5B to 32B, and across nine benchmarks in math reasoning, general question answering, and coding tasks demonstrate that \textsc{ReBalance} effectively reduces output redundancy while improving accuracy, offering a general, training-free, and plug-and-play strategy for efficient and robust LRM deployment. Code and models will be made publicly available.

Reinforcement Learning (RL) has proven highly effective at enhancing the complex reasoning abilities of Large Language Models (LLMs), yet underlying mechanisms driving this success remain largely opaque. Our analysis reveals that puzzling phenomena like ``aha moments", ``length-scaling'' and entropy dynamics are not disparate occurrences but hallmarks of an emergent reasoning hierarchy, akin to the separation of high-level strategic planning from low-level procedural execution in human cognition. We uncover a compelling two-phase dynamic: initially, a model is constrained by procedural correctness and must improve its low-level skills. The learning bottleneck then decisively shifts, with performance gains being driven by the exploration and mastery of high-level strategic planning. This insight exposes a core inefficiency in prevailing RL algorithms like GRPO, which apply optimization pressure agnostically and dilute the learning signal across all tokens. To address this, we propose Hierarchy-Aware Credit Assignment (HICRA), an algorithm that concentrates optimization efforts on high-impact planning tokens. Our extensive experiments validate that HICRA significantly outperforms strong baselines, and offer deep insights into how reasoning advances through the lens of strategic exploration.

Inference-time scaling enhances a model’s reasoning by extending its chain-of-thought (CoT). However, existing approaches typically rely on a single policy trained with outcome-reward reinforcement learning (RL), which often suffers from long-horizon plan failures where the implicit plan drifts from valid strategies, especially for small LMs with limited capacity. To address this, we propose Multi-Level Reasoning (MLR), which reformulates long-CoT generation as a two-level stochastic process. A high-level planner generates structured step descriptors specifying both the reasoning mode and the semantic subgoal. The low-level executor then produces detailed reasoning conditioned on these descriptors, forming an alternating plan--execute loop. To maintain scalability, we adopt a minimal design where the base model serves as the low-level policy and a lightweight LoRA module implements the high-level policy. For training, we observe that outcome-reward RL provides sparse and delayed feedback for long trajectories (e.g., several thousand tokens), hindering credit assignment. We therefore introduce iterative Step-DPO, a process-level preference optimization scheme that leverages Twisted Sequential Monte Carlo (TSMC) to provide scalable stepwise supervision. This yields more effective training, improved stability, and higher accuracy. Extensive experiments on challenging math, science, and logical reasoning benchmarks show that, under the same reduced data budget (10% SFT and 5% preference relative to the DeepSeek-R1 distillation setup), MLR outperforms both SFT-based distillation and strong RL/preference-optimization baselines across multiple base models and tasks. Moreover, MLR exhibits slower performance degradation on long-horizon reasoning, demonstrating stronger robustness under extended CoT generation.

Reinforcement learning from verifiable rewards (RLVR) is an emerging paradigm for improving the reasoning ability of large language models. However, standard on-policy training discards rollout experiences after a single update, leading to computational inefficiency and instability. While prior work on RL has highlighted the benefits of reusing past experience, the role of experience characteristics in shaping learning dynamics of large reasoning models remains underexplored. In this paper, we are the first to investigate what makes a reasoning experience valuable and identify rollout correctness and entropy as effective indicators of experience value. Based on these insights, we propose ExGRPO (Experiential Group Relative Policy Optimization), a framework that organizes and prioritizes valuable experiences, and employs a mixed-policy objective to balance exploration with experience exploitation. Experiments on five backbone models (1.5B-8B parameters) show that ExGRPO consistently improves reasoning performance on mathematical/general benchmarks, with an average gain of +3.5/7.6 points over on-policy RLVR. Moreover, ExGRPO stabilizes training on both stronger and weaker models where on-policy methods fail. These results highlight principled experience management as a key ingredient for efficient and scalable RLVR.

Counterfactual reasoning, a hallmark of intelligence, consists of three steps: inferring latent variables from observations (abduction), constructing alternative situations (interventions), and predicting the outcomes of the alternatives (prediction). This skill is essential for advancing LLMs' causal understanding and expanding their applications in high-stakes domains such as scientific research and healthcare. However, existing efforts in assessing LLM's counterfactual reasoning capabilities tend to skip the abduction step, effectively reducing to interventional reasoning and leading to over-estimated LLM performance. To address this, we introduce executable counterfactuals, a novel framework that operationalizes causal reasoning through code and math problems. Our framework explicitly requires all three steps of counterfactual reasoning and enables scalable synthetic data creation with varying difficulty, creating a new frontier for evaluating and improving LLM's reasoning. Our results reveal substantial drop in accuracy (25-40%) from interventional to counterfactual reasoning for state-of-the-art models such as o4-mini and Claude-4-Sonnet. To address this gap, we construct a training set comprising counterfactual code problems having if-condition and test on out-of-distribution code structures (e.g., having while-loop); we also test whether a model trained on code would generalize to counterfactual math word problems. While Supervised Finetuning (SFT) on stronger models' reasoning traces improves in-distribution performance of Qwen models, it leads to a decrease in accuracy on out-of-distribution tasks such as counterfactual math problems. In contrast, reinforcement learning (RL) induces the core cognitive behaviors and generalizes to new distributions, yielding substantial accuracy gains over the base model on both code (improvement of 1.5x-2x) and counterfactual math problems. Analysis of the reasoning traces further reinforces these findings and highlights the promise of RL with scalable data generation for improving LLMs' counterfactual reasoning.

Recent progress in large reasoning models for challenging mathematical reasoning has been driven by reinforcement learning (RL). Incorporating long chain-of-thought (CoT) data during mid-training has also been shown to substantially improve reasoning depth. However, current approaches often utilize CoT data indiscriminately, leaving open the critical question of which data types most effectively enhance model reasoning capabilities. In this paper, we define the foundation model's reasoning potential for the first time as the inverse of the number of independent attempts required to correctly answer the question, which is strongly correlated with the final model performance. We then propose utilizing diverse data enriched with high-value reasoning patterns to expand the reasoning potential. Specifically, we abstract atomic reasoning patterns from CoT sequences, characterized by commonality and inductive capabilities, and use them to construct a core reference set enriched with valuable reasoning patterns. Furthermore, we propose a dual-granularity algorithm involving chains of reasoning patterns and token entropy, efficiently selecting high-value CoT data (CoTP) from the data pool that aligns with the core set, thereby training models to master reasoning effectively. Only 10B-token CoTP data enables the 85A6B Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) model to improve by **9.58\%** on the challenging AIME 2024 and 2025, and to raise the upper bound of downstream RL performance by **7.81\%**.

The reasoning process of Large Language Models (LLMs) is often plagued by hallucinations and missing facts in question-answering tasks. A promising solution is to ground LLMs' answers in verifiable knowledge sources, such as Knowledge Graphs (KGs). Prevailing KG-enhanced methods typically constrained LLM reasoning either by enforcing rules during generation or by imitating paths from a fixed set of demonstrations. However, they naturally confined the reasoning patterns of LLMs within the scope of prior experience or fine-tuning data, limiting their generalizability to out-of-distribution graph reasoning problems. To tackle this problem, in this paper, we propose Explore-on-Graph (EoG), a novel framework that encourages LLMs to autonomously explore a more diverse reasoning space on KGs. To incentivize exploration and discovery of novel reasoning paths, we propose to introduce reinforcement learning during training, whose reward is the correctness of the reasoning paths' final answers. To enhance the efficiency and meaningfulness of the exploration, we propose to incorporate path information as additional reward signals to refine the exploration process and reduce futile efforts. Extensive experiments on five KGQA benchmark datasets demonstrate that, to the best of our knowledge, our method achieves state-of-the-art performance, outperforming not only open-source but also even closed-source LLMs.

We propose **FROST**, an attention-aware method for efficient reasoning. Unlike traditional approaches, FROST leverages attention weights to prune uncritical reasoning paths, yielding shorter and more reliable reasoning trajectories. Methodologically, we introduce the concept of *reasoning outliers* and design an attention-based mechanism to remove them. Theoretically, FROST preserves and enhances the model’s reasoning capacity while eliminating outliers at the sentence level. Empirically, we validate FROST on four benchmarks using two strong reasoning models (Phi-4-Reasoning and GPT-oss-20B), outperforming state-of-the-art methods such as TALE and ThinkLess. Notably, FROST achieves an average **69.68%** reduction in token usage and a **26.70%** improvement in accuracy over the base model. Furthermore, in evaluations of attention outlier metrics, FROST reduces the maximum infinity norm $\||\mathbf{x}\||_{\infty}$ by **15.97%** and the average kurtosis by **91.09%** compared to the base model.

Any entity in the visual world can be hierarchically grouped based on shared characteristics and mapped to fine-grained sub-categories. While Multi-modal Large Language Models (MLLMs) achieve strong performance on coarse-grained visual tasks, they often struggle with Fine-Grained Visual Recognition (FGVR). Adapting general-purpose MLLMs to FGVR typically requires large amounts of annotated data, which is costly to obtain, leaving a substantial performance gap compared to contrastive CLIP models dedicated for discriminative tasks. Moreover, MLLMs tend to overfit to seen sub-categories and generalize poorly to unseen ones. To address these challenges, we propose Fine-R1, an MLLM tailored for FGVR through an R1-style training framework: (1) Chain-of-Thought Supervised Fine-tuning, where we construct a high-quality FGVR CoT dataset with rationales of "visual analysis, candidate sub-categories, comparison, and prediction”, transition the model into a strong open-world classifier; and (2) Triplet Augmented Policy Optimization, where Intra-class Augmentation mixes trajectories from anchor and positive images within the same category to improve robustness to intra-class variance, while Inter-class Augmentation maximizes the response distinction conditioned on images across sub-categories to enhance discriminative ability. With only 4-shot training, Fine-R1 outperforms existing general MLLMs, reasoning MLLMs, and even contrastive CLIP models in identifying both seen and unseen sub-categories, showing promise in working in knowledge-intensive domains where gathering expert annotations for all sub-categories is arduous. Code is available at [https://github.com/PKU-ICST-MIPL/FineR1_ICLR2026](https://github.com/PKU-ICST-MIPL/FineR1\_ICLR2026).

Large language models (LLMs), such as OpenAI o1 and DeepSeek-R1, excel in contextual reasoning by leveraging extensive world knowledge and deep contextual understanding. However, their high computational costs limit deployment in resource-constrained settings. Conversely, small language models (SLMs) are more computationally efficient but often struggle with contextual reasoning due to limited parameter capacity and challenges like catastrophic forgetting. Existing enhancement methods for SLMs—such as knowledge distillation and data synthesis—still depend on additional training and face inherent limitations. To address this, we propose Navigation, a novel training-free framework that improves SLMs’ contextual reasoning by distilling LLM-derived contextual processing expertise into generalizable navigation templates. These templates, stored in a scalable Navigation database, guide SLMs through a three-stage process—Generation, Utilization, and Update—to locate and process critical information within complex contexts. Experiments demonstrate that our approach yields an average 10.7\% accuracy gain with a template count equivalent to no more than 2.1\% of the dataset size, enabling models such as Qwen2.5-3B-Instruct and Llama-3.2-3B-Instruct to outperform GPT-3.5-Turbo on diverse contextual reasoning tasks.

While Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) have achieved substantial progress in video understanding, their application to long video reasoning is hindered by uniform frame sampling and static textual reasoning, which are inefficient and struggle to handle visually intensive video tasks. To overcome these challenges, in this paper, we introduce the concept of thinking with long videos and propose a novel framework FrameThinker. Within this framework, LVLMs are able to iteratively interrogate video content. Developing such video reasoning capabilities in LVLMs presents notable challenges, particularly in adapting the model to new video actions (e.g. select frame), and designing reward functions to guide LVLMs to adopt the newly introduced action. To solve these challenges, we propose a two-phase training strategy, first employing Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT) to instill fundamental action capabilities, followed by Reinforcement Learning (RL) to optimize a strategic decision-making policy. Notably, in this RL phase, we conduct an in-depth and comprehensive exploration of the reward design for each action and format reward. Extensive experiments on reasoning benchmarks like Video-Holmes, LongVideo-Reason, and long-video understanding benchmarks such as LongVideoBench, MLVU, VideoMME, and LVBench, demonstrate that FrameThinker gets a significant average improvement of +10.4\% over baselines while drastically reducing the number of processed frames. Most notably, our 7B model, FrameThinker establishes a new state-of-the-art on LongVideo-Reason, achieving 76.1\% accuracy using an average of only 20.6 frames. This not only outperforms the competitive LongVILA-R1 (72.0\%) but does so with over 20x fewer frames (vs. 512), demonstrating unparalleled efficiency and effectiveness. Our code is available at: \url{https://github.com/lcqysl/FrameThinker}.

Combining Chain-of-Thought (CoT) with Reinforcement Learning (RL) improves text-to-image (T2I) generation, yet the underlying interaction between CoT's exploration and RL's optimization remains unclear. We present a systematic entropy-based analysis that yields three key insights: (1) CoT expands the generative exploration space, while RL contracts it toward high-reward regions; (2) final reward is strongly negatively correlated with both the mean and variance of image-token entropy, highlighting the need to reduce uncertainty and instability; and (3) the entropy of the textual CoT directly governs downstream image quality, with lower-entropy CoTs leading to better generations. Motivated by these findings, we propose Entropy-Guided Group Relative Policy Optimization (EG-GRPO), a fine-tuning strategy that reallocates optimization budget by uncertainty: low-entropy tokens are excluded from reward-driven updates to preserve stability, while high-entropy tokens receive an entropy bonus that encourages structured exploration without collapse. Experiments on standard T2I benchmarks demonstrate that EG-GRPO achieves state-of-the-art performance.

Solving math problems through verifiable languages such as Lean has significantly impacted both the mathematics and computer science communities. Current state-of-the-art models are often trained with expensive online Reinforcement Learning (RL) or expert iteration. However, these approaches rely on fixed problem sets, which causes inefficient training and limits the model to tackle complex problems. To overcome these limitations, we propose **GAR**: *Generative Adversarial Reinforcement learning*, a comprehensive RL training framework that jointly trains the problem composer and solver in an adversarial loop. **GAR** introduces an implicit curriculum learning mechanism, which aligns task difficulty with the prover's evolving capability. It thereby improves the training efficiency and enables stronger performance of proving advanced theorems. Experiments show that with **GAR** training, Goedel-Prover-V2-8B and DeepSeek-Prover-V2-7B achieve an average relative improvement in pass@32 of **4.20%** on MiniF2F-Test benchmark, while DeepSeek-Prover-V2's pass@32 on ProofNet-Test increases from 22.58% to **25.81%**. Beyond formal proving, **GAR** establishes a general RL paradigm for co-evolution of problem generation and solving under verifiable environments. The training code for this paper is open-sourced in [https://github.com/RickySkywalker/GAR-Official](https://github.com/RickySkywalker/GAR-Official)

Parallel LLM inference scaling involves sampling a set of $N>1$ responses for a single input prompt. However, these $N$ parallel responses tend to be generated independently from each other, partitioning compute resources and leaving potentially useful information in one generation untapped by others. This is in contrast to response length scaling where past computation is used in all future steps. For higher quality responses and response sets, we propose Bridge to generate interdependent responses in parallel by rethinking batched LLM hidden states as holistic tensors rather than independent slices. With only a small amount (2.8\%-5.1\%) of new parameters, Bridge improves the relative mean accuracy gains from reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards by up to 39\% and boosts consistency of correct responses. Trained once, Bridge scales to any generation width, all with greater performance than independent generations, unlocking a more general mode of parallel scaling that effectively leverages information between sequences, compatible with any post-generation aggregation technique.

Large language models (LLMs) with explicit reasoning capabilities excel at mathematical reasoning yet still commit process errors, such as incorrect calculations, brittle logic, and superficially plausible but invalid steps. In this paper, we introduce Generative Adversarial Reasoner, an on-policy joint training framework designed to enhance reasoning by co-evolving an LLM reasoner and an LLM-based discriminator through adversarial reinforcement learning. A compute-efficient review schedule partitions each reasoning chain into logically complete slices of comparable length, and the discriminator evaluates each slice’s soundness with concise, structured justifications. Learning couples complementary signals: the LLM reasoner is rewarded for logically consistent steps that yield correct answers, while the discriminator earns rewards for correctly detecting errors or distinguishing traces in the reasoning process. This produces dense, well-calibrated, on-policy step-level rewards that supplement sparse exact-match signals, improving credit assignment, increasing sample efficiency, and enhancing overall reasoning quality of LLMs. Across various mathematical benchmarks, the method delivers consistent gains over strong baselines with standard RL post-training. Specifically, on AIME24, we improve DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-7B from 54.0 to 61.3 (+7.3) and DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Llama-8B from 43.7 to 53.7 (+10.0). The modular discriminator also enables flexible reward shaping for objectives such as teacher distillation, preference alignment, and mathematical proof-based reasoning.

Automated theorem proving (ATP) --- the task of generating a proof that passes automated proof verification given a math question in formal language --- is a critical challenge at the intersection of mathematics and Artificial Intelligence (AI). We introduce Goedel-Prover-V2, a family of two language models that establish a new state-of-the-art (SOTA) in open-source ATP, using the Lean proof assistant. In addition to standard expert iteration and reinforcement learning, our approach incorporates three key innovations: (1) During training when improvement plateaus on human questions, the prover does scaffolded data synthesis to generate synthetic questions of increasing difficulty for its own training; (2) The prover is trained to self-correct using Lean compiler feedback; (3) Improved test-time exploration through checkpoint averaging to balance accuracy and diversity. Our small model, Goedel-Prover-V2-8B, reaches 84.6\% pass@32 on MiniF2F and outperforms DeepSeek-Prover-V2-671B despite being $80\times$ smaller. Our flagship model, Goedel-Prover-V2-32B, achieves 88.1\% on MiniF2F at pass@32 in standard mode and 90.4\% in self-correction mode, outperforming prior SOTA by a large margin. Additionally, our flagship model solves 86 problems on PutnamBench at pass@184, securing first place among open-source models and surpassing DeepSeek-Prover-V2-671B's record of 47 problems by pass@1024 with about $20\times$ smaller model size and significantly lower compute budget. Our models, code, and data are released at \url{https://github.com/Goedel-LM/Goedel-Prover-V2}.

Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) offers a robust mechanism for enhancing mathematical reasoning in large models. However, we identify a systematic lack of emphasis on more challenging questions in existing methods from both algorithmic and data perspectives, despite their importance for refining underdeveloped capabilities. Algorithmically, widely used Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO) suffers from an implicit imbalance where the magnitude of policy updates is lower for harder questions. Data-wise, augmentation approaches primarily rephrase questions to enhance diversity without systematically increasing intrinsic difficulty. To address these issues, we propose a two-dual MathForge framework to improve mathematical reasoning by targeting harder questions from both perspectives, which comprises a Difficulty-Aware Group Policy Optimization (DGPO) algorithm and a Multi-Aspect Question Reformulation (MQR) strategy. Specifically, DGPO first rectifies the implicit imbalance in GRPO via difficulty-balanced group advantage estimation, and further prioritizes harder questions by difficulty-aware question-level weighting. Meanwhile, MQR reformulates questions across multiple aspects to increase difficulty while maintaining the original gold answer. Overall, MathForge forms a synergistic loop: MQR expands the data frontier, and DGPO effectively learns from the augmented data. Extensive experiments show that MathForge significantly outperforms existing methods on various mathematical reasoning tasks. The code and augmented data are all available at https://github.com/AMAP-ML/MathForge.

Reinforcement Learning from Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) is a promising method for enhancing the complex problem-solving abilities of large language models (LLMs). This is particularly evident in domains requiring long-horizon reasoning and precise execution, such as solving complex mathematical problems where solutions hinge on a fragile sequence of tool-based actions. However, current approaches are often crippled by two interconnected issues: the near-miss problem, where sparse rewards nullify the learning signal for almost-correct attempts, and the resulting exploration stagnation, which prevents the model from discovering better solutions. To address these challenges, we introduce HiPO (Hint-guided Policy Optimization), a novel RLVR framework that enables the agent to learn from its own rare successes. Our core insight is to capture an occasional successful trajectory within a training batch and repurpose its initial correct steps as an on-policy “hint”. This process transforms a single, stochastically-found success into a dense contrastive learning signal, effectively allowing the model to teach itself how to overcome the near-miss problem and break exploration stagnation. On a challenging suite of five mathematical reasoning benchmarks, HiPO improves the average avg@32 by +5.0 percentage points (pp) over the strong GRPO baseline. This improvement is driven by substantial absolute point gains on challenging datasets, including +10.3 pp on CMIMC 2025, +4.9 pp on BRUMO 2025, +4.6 pp on AIME 2024, and +3.1 pp on AIME 2025. Furthermore, HiPO demonstrates a new exploration paradigm, repurposing rare successes into reusable guidance to significantly accelerate skill acquisition for complex tasks, establishing a more efficient and scalable path for models to autonomously master intricate reasoning.

Large Language Models (LLMs) exhibit impressive capabilities yet suffer from sensitivity to slight input context variations, hampering reliability. Conventional metrics like accuracy and perplexity fail to assess local prediction robustness, as normalized output probabilities can obscure the underlying resilience of an LLM's internal state to perturbations. We introduce the Token Constraint Bound ($\delta_{\mathrm{TCB}}$), a novel metric that quantifies the maximum internal state perturbation an LLM can withstand before its dominant next-token prediction significantly changes. Intrinsically linked to output embedding space geometry, $\delta_{\mathrm{TCB}}$ provides insights into the stability of the model's internal predictive commitment. Our experiments show $\delta_{\mathrm{TCB}}$ correlates with effective prompt engineering and uncovers critical prediction instabilities missed by perplexity during in-context learning and text generation. $\delta_{\mathrm{TCB}}$ offers a principled, complementary approach to analyze and potentially improve the contextual stability of LLM predictions.

Transformers have demonstrated remarkable in-context learning abilities, adapting to new tasks from just a few examples without parameter updates. However, theoretical understanding of this phenomenon typically assumes fixed dependency structures, while real-world sequences exhibit flexible, context-dependent relationships. We address this gap by investigating whether transformers can learn causal structures -- the underlying dependencies between sequence elements -- directly from in-context examples. We propose a novel framework using Markov chains with randomly sampled causal dependencies, where transformers must infer which tokens depend on which predecessors to make accurate predictions. Our key contributions are threefold: (1) We prove that a two-layer transformer with relative positional embeddings can implement Bayesian Model Averaging (BMA), the optimal statistical algorithm for causal structure inference; (2) Through extensive experiments and parameter-level analysis, we demonstrate that transformers trained on this task approximate BMA, with attention patterns directly reflecting the inferred causal structures; (3) We provide information-theoretic guarantees showing how transformers recover causal dependencies and extend our analysis to continuous dynamical systems, revealing fundamental differences in representational requirements. Our findings bridge the gap between empirical observations of in-context learning and theoretical understanding, showing that transformers can perform sophisticated statistical inference over structural uncertainty.

Outcome-reward reinforcement learning (RL) has proven effective at improving the reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs). However, standard RL assigns credit only at the level of the final answer, penalizing entire reasoning traces when the outcome is incorrect and uniformly reinforcing all steps when it is correct. As a result, correct intermediate steps may be discouraged in failed traces, while spurious steps may be reinforced in successful ones. We refer to this failure mode as the problem of credit assignment. While a natural remedy is to train a process reward model, accurately optimizing such models to identify corrective reasoning steps remains challenging. We introduce Intervention Training (InT), a training paradigm in which the model performs fine-grained credit assignment on its own reasoning traces by proposing short, targeted corrections that steer trajectories toward higher reward. Using reference solutions commonly available in mathematical reasoning datasets and exploiting the fact that verifying a model-generated solution is easier than generating a correct one from scratch, the model identifies the first error in its reasoning and proposes a single-step intervention to redirect the trajectory toward the correct solution. We then apply supervised fine-tuning (SFT) to the on-policy rollout up to the point of error concatenated with the intervention, localizing error to the specific step that caused failure. We show that the resulting model serves as a far better initialization for RL training. After running InT and subsequent fine-tuning with RL, we improve accuracy by nearly 14% over a 4B-parameter base model on IMO-AnswerBench, outperforming larger open-source models such as gpt-oss-20b.

In this work, we propose ***R**einforced **F**unctional **T**oken **T**uning* (RFTT), a novel reinforced fine-tuning framework that empowers Large Language Models (LLMs) with learn-to-reason capabilities. Unlike prior prompt-driven reasoning efforts, RFTT embeds a rich set of learnable functional tokens (*e.g.*, \<analyze\>, \<verify\>, \<refine\>) directly into the model vocabulary, enabling chain-of-thought construction with diverse human-like reasoning behaviors. Specifically, RFTT comprises two phases: (1) supervised fine-tuning performs prompt-driven tree search to obtain self-generated training data annotated with functional tokens, which warms up the model to learn these tokens for initial reasoning capability; and (2) online reinforcement learning further allows the model to explore diverse reasoning pathways through functional token sampling without relying on prompts, thereby facilitating effective self-improvement for functional reasoning. Extensive experiments demonstrate the superiority of the proposed RFTT on mathematical benchmarks and highlight its strong generalization capability to other general domains. Moreover, the performance of RFTT exhibits consistent gains with increased test-time computation through additional search rollouts. Our code and dataset are available at https://github.com/sastpg/RFTT.

In-context learning (ICL) allows some autoregressive models to solve tasks via next-token prediction and without needing further training. This has led to claims about these model's ability to solve (learn) unseen tasks with only a few shots (exemplars) in the prompt. However, deduction does not always imply learning, as ICL does not explicitly encode a given observation. Instead, the models rely on their prior knowledge and the exemplars given, if any. We argue that, mathematically, ICL fits the definition of learning; however, its full characterisation requires empirical work. We then carry out a large-scale analysis of ICL ablating out or accounting for memorisation, pretraining, distributional shifts, and prompting style and phrasing. We find that, empirically, ICL is limited in its ability to learn and generalise to unseen tasks. Namely, in the limit where exemplars become more numerous, accuracy is insensitive to exemplar distribution, model, prompt style, and the input's linguistic features. Instead, it deduces patterns from regularities in the prompt, which leads to distributional sensitivity, especially in prompting styles such as chain-of-thought. Given the varied accuracies and on formally similar tasks, we conclude that autoregression's _ad-hoc_ encoding is not a robust mechanism for learning, and suggests limited all-purpose generalisability.

Frontier language models demonstrate increasing ability at solving reasoning problems, but their performance is often inflated by circumventing reasoning and instead relying on their expanding knowledge and memorisation capacity. We introduce LINGOLY-TOO, a challenging reasoning benchmark of 1,203 questions and a total of 6,995 sub-questions that counters these shortcuts by applying expert- designed obfuscations to Linguistics Olympiad problems. These obfuscations preserve the underlying solution logic while reducing the likelihood problems are solvable with via knowledge or memorisation. Our experiments show that models exploit shortcuts on the original question as performance markedly drop upon obfuscation. Even the best reasoning models remain highly sensitive, with scores dropping from around 0.59 on original problems to 0.48 after obfuscation. LINGOLY-TOO disentangles reasoning from knowledge, offering a clearer measure of true reasoning capabilities.

The ability to robustly identify causal relationships is essential for autonomous decision-making and adaptation to novel scenarios. However, accurately inferring causal structure requires integrating both world knowledge and abstract logical reasoning. In this work, we investigate the interaction between these two capabilities through the representative task of causal reasoning over narratives. Through controlled synthetic, semi-synthetic and real-world experiments, we find that state-of-the-art large language models (LLMs) often rely on superficial heuristics—for example, inferring causality from event order or recalling memorized world knowledge without attending to context. Furthermore, we show that simple reformulations of the task can elicit more robust reasoning behavior. Our evaluation spans a range of causal structures, from linear chains to complex graphs involving colliders and forks. These findings uncover systematic patterns in how LLMs perform causal reasoning and lay the groundwork for developing methods that better align LLM behavior with principled causal inference.

Human cognition naturally engages with abstract and fluid concepts, whereas existing reasoning models often rely on generating discrete tokens, potentially constraining their expressive capabilities. Recent advancements aim to address this limitation by enabling large language models (LLMs) to generate soft, abstract tokens, thus facilitating reasoning within a continuous concept space. In this paper, we investigate the $\textit{Soft Thinking}$ capabilities of various LLMs through a systematic analysis of their internal behavior using a suite of probing techniques. Contrary to the prevailing belief that Soft Thinking supports parallel exploration of diverse reasoning paths, our findings reveal that $\textbf{LLMs behave as single-threaded reasoners}$—they predominantly rely on the token with the highest probability in the soft input to predict the next step. This behavior induces a greedy feedback loop that suppresses alternative reasoning paths and undermines the benefits of transmitting richer information via Soft Tokens. To address this $\textit{Greedy Pitfall}$, we propose $\textbf{Stochastic Soft Thinking}$, which introduces stochasticity to break free from the greedy tendency. Our experiments demonstrate that incorporating $\textit{randomness}$—particularly with the $\textbf{Gumbel-Softmax trick}$—can alleviate the limitations of vanilla approaches and unleash the potential of Soft Thinking, resulting in superior performance across eight reasoning benchmarks.

Large Language Models (LLMs) demonstrate their reasoning ability through chain-of-thought (CoT) generation. However, LLM's autoregressive decoding may limit the ability to revisit and refine earlier tokens in a holistic manner, which can also lead to inefficient exploration for diverse solutions. In this paper, we propose LaDiR (Lalent Diffusion Reasoner), a novel reasoning framework that unifies the expressiveness of continuous latent representation with the iterative refinement capabilities of latent diffusion models for an existing LLM. We first construct a structured latent reasoning space using a Variational Autoencoder (VAE) that encodes text reasoning steps into blocks of thought tokens, preserving semantic information and interpretability while offering compact but expressive representations. Subsequently, we utilize a latent diffusion model that learns to denoise a block of latent thought tokens with a blockwise bidirectional attention mask, enabling longer horizon and iterative refinement with adaptive test-time compute. This design, combined with explicit diversity guidance during diffusion inference, enables the generation of multiple diverse reasoning trajectories that explore distinct regions of the latent space, rather than producing repetitive solutions as often occurs in standard autoregressive sampling. We conduct evaluations on a suite of mathematical reasoning and planning benchmarks. Empirical results show that LaDiR consistently improves accuracy, diversity, and interpretability over existing autoregressive, diffusion-based, and latent reasoning methods, revealing a new paradigm for text reasoning with latent diffusion.

Numerous applications of large language models (LLMs) rely on their ability to perform step-by-step reasoning. However, the reasoning behavior of LLMs remains poorly understood, posing challenges to research, development, and safety. To address this gap, we introduce landscape of thoughts (LoT), the first landscape visualization tool to inspect the reasoning trajectories with certain reasoning methods on any multi-choice dataset. We represent the textual states in a trajectory as numerical features that quantify the states' distances to the answer choices. These features are then visualized in two-dimensional plots using t-SNE. Qualitative and quantitative analysis with the landscape of thoughts effectively distinguishes between strong and weak models, correct and incorrect answers, as well as different reasoning tasks. It also uncovers undesirable reasoning patterns, such as low consistency and high uncertainty. Additionally, users can adapt LoT to a model that predicts the property they observe. We showcase this advantage by adapting LoT to a lightweight verifier that evaluates the correctness of trajectories. Empirically, this verifier boosts the reasoning accuracy and the test-time scaling effect. The code is publicly available at: https://github.com/tmlr-group/landscape-of-thoughts.

Large Language Models (LLMs) excel at problem solving by generating chain of thoughts in natural language, but such verbal thinking is computationally costly and prone to overthinking. A recent work instead proposes a latent thinking architecture, Huginn-3.5B, which represents intermediate reasoning steps as a sequence of latent representations. However, latent thoughts lack interpretability and are difficult to supervise, raising concerns about the correctness and reliability of the model's latent thinking processes. In this paper, we provide a systematic study of how Huginn-3.5B thinks in the latent space and how external supervision signals can improve its latent thinking processes. We show that latent thoughts leading to correct versus incorrect answers exhibit highly distinguishable patterns, and that a latent classifier can reliably predict answer correctness directly from latent thoughts. Leveraging these insights, we propose Latent Thinking Optimization (LTO), a probabilistic algorithm that employs the latent classifier as a Latent Reward Model (LRM) to optimize the latent thinking processes. Extensive experiments across diverse reasoning tasks demonstrate that LRM is highly effective in detecting incorrect latent thinking patterns, and LTO can significantly improve the latent thinking processes. Furthermore, we show that LRM can generalize across diverse domains, and LTO can be seamlessly applied to general LLMs to improve their thinking processes. In contrast to verbal thinking, our method demonstrates that reward modeling and scaling test-time thinking with supervision can be performed directly in the latent space, highlighting its potential as a general, efficient, and domain-agnostic approach to improving the thinking processes of LLMs.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable capabilities in complex reasoning tasks, but their high computational costs limit their widespread practical application. We argue that this inefficiency arises from the tight coupling of high-level cognitive planning (devising the solution strategy) and low-level linguistic realization (generating step-by-step text). To address this challenge, we propose a novel collaborative framework that decouples these two processes through Latent Guidance. Our approach implements a division of labor: a large model acts as an Implicit Thinker, performing high-level cognitive planning and compressing its solution strategy into a set of compact latent guidance vectors. A small, efficient model then serves as an Explicit Executor, which receives this latent guidance to generate a concise and effective reasoning chain. This process is enabled by a dual-loss training objective, grounded in information-theoretic principles, where a reconstruction loss explicitly compels the latent guidance to become a high-fidelity representation of the full reasoning chain. Extensive experiments on 8 diverse reasoning benchmarks demonstrate that our method substantially enhances the reasoning capabilities of small models across various scales (from 0.5B to 8B), allowing them to outperform strong baselines and exhibit superior generalization. Notably, our framework boosts small model accuracy by up to 13.9% over its standalone baseline. Our work introduces a new, theoretically-grounded paradigm for empowering small models with large-model thinking, substantially improving the performance-cost trade-off for complex reasoning.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have recently improved mathematical reasoning through Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Reward (RLVR). However, existing RLVR algorithms require large query budgets, making annotation costly. We investigate whether fewer but more informative queries can yield similar or superior performance, introducing active learning (AL) into RLVR. We identify that classic AL sampling strategies fail to outperform random selection in this setting, due to ignoring \textbf{objective uncertainty} when only selecting by subjective uncertainty. This work proposes an \textbf{uncertainty consistency} metric to evaluate how well subjective uncertainty aligns with objective uncertainty. In the offline setting, this alignment is measured using the Point-Biserial Correlation Coefficient (PBC). For online training, because of limited sampling and dynamically shifting output distributions, PBC estimation is difficult. Therefore, we introduce a new online variant, computed from normalized advantage and subjective uncertainty. Theoretically, we prove that the online variant is strictly negatively correlated with offline PBC and supports better sample selection. Experiments show our method consistently outperforms random and classic AL baselines, achieving full-dataset performance while training on only 30\% of the data, effectively reducing the cost of RLVR for reasoning tasks.\footnote{The code is available at \hyperref[https://github.com/yihao-123/uncertainty-consistency]{https://github.com/yihao-123/uncertainty-consistency}. }

Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) have shown remarkable capabilities in solving complex problems through reinforcement learning (RL), particularly by generating long reasoning traces. However, these extended outputs often exhibit substantial redundancy, which limits the efficiency of LRMs. In this paper, we investigate RL-based approaches to promote reasoning efficiency. Specifically, we first present a unified framework that formulates various efficient reasoning methods through the lens of length-based reward shaping. Building on this perspective, we propose a novel **L**ength-b**A**sed **S**t**E**p **R**eward shaping method (LASER), which employs a step function as the reward based on target length. LASER surpasses previous methods, achieving a superior trade-off between performance and efficiency. Next, we further extend LASER based on two key intuitions: (1) The reasoning behavior of the model evolves dynamically during training, necessitating reward specifications that are also adaptive and dynamic; (2) Rather than uniformly encouraging shorter or longer chains of thought (CoT), we posit that length-based reward shaping should be difficulty-aware i.e., it should penalize lengthy CoTs more for easy queries. This approach is expected to facilitate a combination of fast and slow thinking, leading to a better overall tradeoff. The resulting method is termed LASER-D (**D**ynamic and **D**ifficulty-aware). Experiments on five open-weight models from 1.5B to 32B demonstrate that our approach significantly enhances both reasoning performance and response length efficiency. For instance, LASER-D achieves a **5.3** improvement on AIME2024 while reducing token usage by **64**%. Further analysis reveals that our RL-based compression produces more concise reasoning patterns with less redundant ``self-reflections''. All resources (Models, Code, Data) are available at https://github.com/hkust-nlp/Laser.

Chain-of-Thought (CoT) has been shown to significantly improve the reasoning accuracy of large language models (LLMs) on complex tasks. However, due to the autoregressive, step-by-step generation paradigm, existing CoT methods suffer from two fundamental limitations. First, the reasoning process is highly susceptible to early-stage errors, which tend to propagate and amplify without a global coordination and correction mechanism, thereby distorting the overall reasoning chain. Second, current CoT methods lack structured analytical frameworks for pruning redundant reasoning and identifying critical reasoning features, resulting in instability and reduced interpretability. To address these issues, we propose Global Hypothesis Structure via Topological Data Analysis (GHS-TDA), which constructs a semantically enriched global hypothesis graph that integrates and coordinates multiple candidate reasoning paths, thereby supporting global consistency refinement and error mitigation. GHS-TDA applies persistent homology-based topological data analysis to capture stable multi-scale structures, remove redundancy and inconsistencies, and extract a more reliable reasoning skeleton. By jointly leveraging reasoning diversity and topological stability, GHS-TDA achieves self-adaptive convergence, produces high-confidence and interpretable reasoning paths, and consistently outperforms strong baselines in terms of both accuracy and robustness across multiple reasoning benchmarks.

Reinforcement Learning (RL) has been shown to significantly boost reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs) in math, coding, and multi-hop reasoning tasks. However, RL fine-tuning requires abundant high-quality verifiable data, often sourced from human annotations, generated from frontier LLMs, or scored by LLM-based verifiers. All three have considerable limitations: human-annotated datasets are small and expensive to curate, LLM-generated data is hallucination-prone and costly, and LLM-based verifiers are inaccurate and slow. In this work, we investigate a cheaper alternative: RL fine-tuning on _rule-generated synthetic data_ for multi-hop reasoning tasks. We discover that LLMs fine-tuned on synthetic data perform significantly better on popular real-world question-answering benchmarks, despite the synthetic data containing only fictional knowledge. On stratifying performance by question difficulty, we find that synthetic data teaches LLMs to _compose knowledge_---a fundamental and generalizable reasoning skill. Our work highlights rule-generated synthetic reasoning data as a free and scalable resource to improve LLM reasoning capabilities.

Large reasoning models (LRMs) often consume excessive tokens, inflating computational cost and latency. More broadly, in goal reaching sequential decision problems we often want to reach the goal quickly, and LRM reasoning can be viewed through this lens. We challenge the assumption that longer responses improve accuracy. By penalizing reasoning tokens using a discounted reinforcement learning setup (interpretable as a small token cost) and analyzing Blackwell optimality in restricted policy classes, we encourage concise yet accurate reasoning, analogous to preferring shorter successful trajectories in a stochastic shortest path problem. Experiments confirm our theoretical results that this approach shortens chains of thought while preserving accuracy.

Large language models (LLMs) have achieved significant advancements in reasoning capabilities through reinforcement learning (RL) via environmental exploration. As the intrinsic properties of the environment determine the abilities that LLMs can learn, the environment plays an important role in the RL finetuning process. An ideal LLM reasoning environment should possess three core characteristics: scalability, generalizable reasoning, and verifiability. However, existing mathematical and coding environments are difficult to scale due to heavy reliance on expert annotation, while the skills learned in game-based environments are too specialized to generalize. To bridge this gap, we introduce the \textbf{S}tructured \textbf{I}n-context \textbf{E}nvironment (SIE) framework. SIE achieves scalability by automatically constructing reasoning environments from large-scale structured data, where the rich compositional patterns naturally support generalizable reasoning. Moreover, the explicit schemas and reasoning chains in structured data provide a foundation for rule-based verifiability. Experimental results show that the SIE framework not only achieves substantial improvements in in-domain structured reasoning, but also enables the learned compositional reasoning skills to generalize effectively to out-of-domain mathematical and logical reasoning tasks. We further explored learning in information-limited partial SIEs and found that LLMs can infer the missing information through exploring the environment, leading to robust reasoning improvements and generalization performance. Our code can be available at \url{https://github.com/PursuitYP/SIE_ICLR}.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown strong performance in complex reasoning tasks, especially when guided by Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting. However, conventional CoT reasoning in the discrete token space suffers from high computational and memory costs due to verbose intermediate steps. Recent work has explored latent reasoning in the embedding space to improve efficiency, but often at the cost of clarity and performance. In this work, we propose $\underline{Hy}$brid $\underline{Rea}$soning ($\texttt{HyRea}$), a unified framework that enables LLMs to dynamically switch between explicit (token-based) and latent (embedding-based) reasoning during inference. To train the model to make these decisions effectively, we introduce a two-stage training pipeline: (1) a supervised cold-start phase that introduces latent reasoning by replacing low-entropy CoT steps with embeddings, and (2) a reinforcement learning phase using Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO) to fine-tune the model’s reasoning strategy based on task-specific rewards. Experiments on mathematical reasoning benchmarks show that \texttt{HyRea} achieves significant reductions in token usage while maintaining or improving accuracy, offering an effective and scalable solution for efficient multi-step reasoning in LLMs.

Human beings naturally utilize multiple reasoning modalities to learn and solve logical problems, i.e., different representational formats such as natural language, code, and symbolic logic. In contrast, most existing LLM-based approaches operate with a single reasoning modality during training, typically natural language. Although some methods explored modality selection or augmentation at inference time, the training process remains modality-blind, limiting synergy among modalities. To fill in this gap, we propose Mixture-of-Thought (MoT), a framework that enables LLMs to reason across three complementary modalities: natural language, code, and a newly introduced symbolic modality, truth-table, which systematically enumerates logical cases and partially mitigates key failure modes in natural language reasoning. MoT adopts a two-phase design: (1) **self-evolving MoT training**, which jointly learns from filtered, self-generated rationales across modalities; and (2) **MoT inference**, which fully leverages the synergy of three modalities to produce better predictions. Experiments on logical reasoning benchmarks including FOLIO and ProofWriter demonstrate that our MoT framework consistently and significantly outperforms strong LLM baselines with single-modality chain-of-thought approaches, achieving up to **+11.7pp** average accuracy gain. Further analyses show that our MoT framework benefits both training and inference stages; that it is particularly effective on harder logical reasoning problems; and that different modalities contribute complementary strengths, with truth-table reasoning helping to overcome key bottlenecks in natural language inference.

Training large language models (LLMs) for complex reasoning via Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) is effective but limited by reliance on costly, domain-specific supervision. We explore Reinforcement Learning from Internal Feedback (RLIF), a framework that enables LLMs to learn from intrinsic signals without external rewards or labeled data. We propose Intuitor, an RLIF method that uses a model's own confidence—termed self-certainty—as its sole reward signal. Intuitor replaces external rewards in Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO) with self-certainty scores, enabling fully unsupervised learning. Experiments demonstrate that Intuitor matches GRPO's performance on mathematical benchmarks while achieving better generalization to out-of-domain tasks like code generation, without requiring gold solutions or test cases. Our findings show that intrinsic model signals can drive effective learning across domains, offering a scalable alternative to RLVR for autonomous AI systems where verifiable rewards are unavailable. Code is available at https://github.com/sunblaze-ucb/Intuitor

Large language models (LLMs) adapted to specific languages through continual pretraining or instruction tuning often suffer from catastrophic forgetting, which can lead to factual inaccuracies. This issue is particularly pronounced in multilingual settings, where adaptation may override general world knowledge with language-specific patterns. We propose LoRA-Gated Contrastive Decoding (LGCD), a training-free inference-time decoding framework that improves factuality in language-adapted LLMs by leveraging knowledge from the original pretrained model. LGCD operates by (1) extracting factual representations from Feed-Forward Network (FFN) layers via LoRA-based decomposition, approximating pretrained knowledge, (2) dynamically gating decoding based on token-level confidence, and (3) applying contrastive decoding with Top-K masking to revise uncertain predictions by referencing the approximated representation of pretrained knowledge. LGCD requires no additional training or access to the original pretraining data. Extensive experiments with LGCD on multilingual multiple-choice and long-form QA tasks across nine languages demonstrate its strong effectiveness in mitigating hallucinations and enhancing factual accuracy in language-adapted models. These results further indicate that pretrained knowledge can be strategically reintroduced during decoding to promote factual multilingual generation.

Process Reward Models (PRMs) have emerged as a promising approach to enhance the reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs) by guiding their step-by-step reasoning toward a final answer. However, existing PRMs either treat each reasoning step in isolation, failing to capture inter-step dependencies, or struggle to align process rewards with the final outcome. Consequently, the reward signal fails to respect temporal causality in sequential reasoning and faces ambiguous credit assignment. These limitations make downstream models vulnerable to reward hacking and lead to suboptimal performance. In this work, we propose Conditional Reward Modeling (CRM) that frames LLM reasoning as a temporal process leading to a correct answer. The reward of each reasoning step is not only conditioned on the preceding steps but also explicitly linked to the final outcome of the reasoning trajectory. By enforcing conditional probability rules, our design captures the causal relationships among reasoning steps, with the link to the outcome allowing precise attribution of each intermediate step, thereby resolving credit assignment ambiguity. Further, through this consistent probabilistic modeling, the rewards produced by CRM enable more reliable cross-sample comparison. Experiments across Best-of-N sampling, beam search and reinforcement learning demonstrate that CRM consistently outperforms existing reward models, offering a principled framework for enhancing LLM reasoning. In particular, CRM is more robust to reward hacking and delivers stable downstream improvements without relying on verifiable rewards derived from ground truth.

While large reasoning models have shown remarkable ability to generate long chains-of-thought (CoTs) in English, we still lack understanding of how these long-form reasoning abilities transfer to the vast majority of the world’s languages. In this work, we systematically investigate four key stages of model development–scaling, pretraining, post-training, and inference–to understand how long CoT capabilities extend beyond English. We compare two reasoning settings across nine non-English target languages: En-CoT, where models process target-language inputs, but reason in English; and Target-CoT, where models both process inputs and generate long CoTs in the target language. We find that scaling reasoning model size improves multilingual task performance in En-CoT, but Target-CoT performance lags behind. This gap widens for tasks requiring long, multi-step CoTs such as mathematical reasoning. Shifting to pretraining, we find that adding a specialized reasoning stage enhances En-CoT performance but degrades Target-CoT, whereas broad multilingual pretraining improves both modes simultaneously. Given the scarcity of high-quality reasoning traces in languages other than English, we explore synthetic data curation approaches for post-training. We demonstrate that fine-tuning on reasoning traces automatically translated from gold English traces outperforms fine-tuning on target-language traces distilled from large reasoning models. Finally, we report disparities in inference efficiency between languages and uncover language-specific failure modes in CoTs. We release models, datasets, and code to foster further research.

Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR), particularly with algorithms like Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO), has proven highly effective in enhancing the reasoning capabilities of large language models. However, a critical bottleneck in current pipelines lies in the limited diversity of sampled trajectories during group rollouts. Homogeneous trajectories and their associated rewards would diminish the return signals for policy updates, thereby hindering effective policy learning. This lack of diversity stems primarily from token-level stochastic sampling, where local variations are likely to collapse into near-identical reasoning paths. To address this limitation, we propose Lookahead Tree-Based Rollouts (LATR), a novel rollout strategy designed to explicitly promotes trajectory-level diversity by enforcing branching into different candidate tokens likely to yield distinct continuations. Specifically, LATR iteratively operates in three stages: (1) branching at high-uncertainty generation steps, (2) performing lookahead simulation for each new branch, and (3) pruning branches that exhibits prolonged similarity during simulation. Compared with Stochastic Sampling, LATR accelerates policy learning by 131% on average and improves final pass@1 performance by 4.2% on both GRPO and Dynamic sAmpling Policy Optimization (DAPO) algorithms across different reasoning tasks. Our code and data are available at https://github.com/starreeze/latr.