Proactive agents that anticipate user needs and autonomously execute tasks hold great promise as digital assistants, yet the lack of realistic user simulation frameworks hinders their development. Existing approaches model apps as flat tool-calling APIs, failing to capture the stateful and sequential nature of user interaction in digital environments and making realistic user simulation infeasible. We introduce Proactive Agent Research Environment (Pare), a framework for building and evaluating proactive agents in digital environments. Pare models applications as finite state machines with stateful navigation and state-dependent action space for the user simulator, enabling active user simulation. Building on this foundation, we present Pare-Bench, a benchmark of 143 diverse tasks spanning communication, productivity, scheduling, and lifestyle apps, designed to test context observation, goal inference, intervention timing, and multi-app orchestration.

Autonomous AI Research promises to accelerate the scientific progress of machine learning. To realise this goal, current Large Language Model (LLM)-based agents need to go beyond just writing code, to mastering the exploration of simultaneously performant, diverse and novel ideas. To this end, we introduce Heuresis, a framework that abstracts the research pipeline into a set of general and composable primitives, enabling open-ended scientific exploration in machine learning research. We implement six search strategies: a greedy baseline, two archive-based (MAP-Elites, Go-Explore), one evolutionary (Islands), and two divergent (Curiosity, Omni), and evaluate them across three axes (Quality, Diversity, and Novelty) on three domains (LLM Pretraining, On-Policy RL, and Model Unlearning), totalling 3,222 scored runs. We find that completely novel ideas are rare. No idea across our scored runs is rated as "Original", and only a few achieve only "Minor Similarity" to prior work. Moreover, novel ideas never approach the highest-performing known-recipe scores. Across all six strategies and three domains, only one such idea lands in the top-10 by quality. We also observed agents resorting to a variety of reward-hacking techniques during execution (40 confirmed fabrications across 1,628 scored runs), and detecting them was necessary to keep the search faithful to the task. Our results show that while current search and Quality-Diversity strategies enable us to steer where the generated ideas land on the quality, diversity, and novelty axes, they do not expand the quality-novelty frontier. Bridging this gap is the open challenge towards the ultimate goal of perpetual, autonomous scientific progress. Code is available at github.com/a-antoniades/Heuresis.

Despite their remarkable success in complex tasks propelling widespread adoption, large language model based agents still face critical deployment challenges due to prohibitive latency and inference costs. While recent work has explored various methods to accelerate inference, existing approaches suffer from significant limitations: they either fail to preserve performance fidelity, require extensive offline training of router modules, or incur excessive operational costs. Moreover, they provide minimal user control over the tradeoff between acceleration and other performance metrics. To address these gaps, we introduce **Dynamic Speculative Planning** (DSP), an asynchronous online reinforcement learning framework that provides lossless acceleration with substantially reduced costs without requiring additional pre-deployment preparation. DSP explicitly optimizes a joint objective balancing end-to-end latency against dollar cost, allowing practitioners to adjust a single parameter that steers the system toward faster responses, cheaper operation, or any point along this continuum. Experiments on two standard agent benchmarks demonstrate that DSP achieves comparable efficiency to the fastest lossless acceleration method while reducing total cost by 30\% and unnecessary cost up to 60\%. Our code and data are available through \url{https://anonymous.4open.science/r/Dynamic-Speculative-Planning-F574}

Process Reward Models (PRMs) enhance reasoning ability of LLMs by providing step-level supervision. However, their widespread adoption is limited due to expensive manual step-level annotation and poor generalization of static training data to novel errors. We introduce Adversarially Trained PRMs (), where a Generator (G) learns to produce reasoning errors to deceive a PRM (R), while R concurrently learns to detect them. This interaction yields progressively harder negatives for R, improving its robustness and generalization to novel errors without requiring manual step-level labels. Averaged across diverse mathematical reasoning benchmarks, improves solver accuracy by +3.4 percentage points (pp) over the strongest PRM baseline. achieves gains of +5.3 pp on out-of-distribution tasks.

Recent advancements in large video models (LVMs) have significantly enhanced video understanding. However, these models continue to suffer from hallucinations, producing content that conflicts with input videos. To address this issue, we propose Dr.V, a hierarchical framework covering perceptive, temporal, and cognitive levels to diagnose and mitigate video hallucination by fine-grained spatial-temporal grounding. Dr.V comprises two key components: a benchmark dataset Dr.V-Bench, and a satellite video agent Dr.V-Agent. Dr.V-Bench includes 10k instances drawn from 4,974 videos spanning diverse tasks, each enriched with detailed spatial-temporal annotation. Dr.V-Agent detects hallucinations in LVMs by systematically applying fine-grained spatial-temporal grounding at the perceptive and temporal levels, followed by cognitive level reasoning, and subsequently guides the LVMs to correct their responses through structured feedback. This step-by-step pipeline mirrors human-like video comprehension and effectively identifies and rectifies hallucinations. Extensive experiments demonstrate that Dr.V-Agent is effective in both diagnosing and mitigating hallucination while enhancing interpretability and reliability, offering a practical blueprint for robust video understanding in real-world scenarios. All our data and code ( https://github.com/Eurekaleo/Dr.V ) will be made open to facilitate future research.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have emerged as a new information channel. Meanwhile, one critical but under-explored question is: Is it possible to bypass the safety alignment and inject harmful information into LLMs stealthily? In this paper, we propose to reformulate knowledge editing as a new type of safety threat for LLMs, namely Editing Attack, and conduct a systematic investigation with a newly constructed dataset EditAttack. Specifically, we focus on two typical safety risks of Editing Attack including Misinformation Injection and Bias Injection. For the first risk, we find that editing attacks can inject both commonsense and long-tail misinformation into LLMs, and the effectiveness for the former one is particularly high. For the second risk, we discover that not only can biased sentences be injected into LLMs with high effectiveness, but also one single biased sentence injection can degrade the overall fairness. Then, we further illustrate the high stealthiness of editing attacks. Our discoveries demonstrate the emerging misuse risks of knowledge editing techniques on compromising the safety alignment of LLMs and the feasibility of disseminating misinformation or bias with LLMs as new channels.

Recent progress in large language model (LLM) reasoning has focused on domains like mathematics and coding, where abundant high-quality data and objective evaluation metrics are readily available. In contrast, progress in LLM reasoning models remains limited in scientific domains such as medicine and materials science due to limited dataset coverage and the inherent complexity of open-ended scientific questions. To address these challenges, we introduce WildSci, a new dataset of domain-specific science questions automatically synthesized from peer-reviewed literature, covering 9 scientific disciplines and 26 subdomains. By framing complex scientific reasoning tasks in a multiple-choice format, we enable scalable training with well-defined reward signals. We further apply reinforcement learning to finetune models on these data and analyze the resulting training dynamics, including domain-specific performance changes, response behaviors, and generalization trends. Experiments on a suite of scientific benchmarks demonstrate the effectiveness of our dataset and approach. We release WildSci to enable scalable and sustainable research in scientific reasoning, available at https://huggingface.co/datasets/JustinTX/WildSci.

Autoregressive language models are trained exclusively left-to-right. We explore the complementary factorization, training right-to-left at scale, and ask what reasoning patterns emerge when a model conditions on future context to predict the past.We train LEDOM, an open-source purely reverse autoregressive language model (2B/7B parameters, 435B tokens), and find it develops capabilities distinct from forward models, including abductive inference, question synthesis, and structural handling of the reversal curse.We then explore one application of the reverse model: combining forward likelihood P(y ∣ x) with reverse posterior P(x ∣ y) through noisy channel duality. We propose Reverse Reward, which reranks forward outputs using reverse posterior estimates, and prove that bidirectional scoring penalizes hallucinated reasoning chains whose backward reconstruction degrades.Reverse Reward yields gains of up to 6.6% on AIME 2024 and 15% on AMC 2023 across multiple strong baselines. We release all codes at https://github.com/Arvid-pku/LEDOM.

Reasoning is a core capability of language models (LMs), yet it remains unclear how much model capacity is necessary to support reasoning during pretraining. In this work, we study the minimal parameter budget required for implicit reasoning, defined as the ability to infer new facts from learned knowledge without explicit chain-of-thought supervision. To isolate this phenomenon, we pretrain LMs from scratch in a controlled synthetic environment that mimics the structure and distribution of real-world knowledge graphs, and evaluate their ability to complete missing edges via multi-hop inference. From both a theoretical and an empirical perspective, we identify a scaling law linking this optimal parameter budget to a graph search entropy measure. Across a wide range of model sizes, training steps, and graph complexities, we show that an optimally sized language model can reliably reason over approximately 0.008 bits of information per parameter at most. Our results characterize the minimal sufficient capacity for implicit reasoning during pretraining. Our findings provide principled guidance for matching model size to data complexity and offer new insights into the scaling behavior of reasoning in large language models.

Although LLMs exhibit strong reasoning capabilities, existing training methods largely depend on outcome-based feedback, which can produce correct answers with flawed reasoning. Prior work introduces supervision on intermediate steps but still lacks guarantees of logical soundness, which is crucial in high-stakes scenarios where logical consistency is paramount. To address this, we propose LogicReward, a novel reward system that guides model training by enforcing step-level logical correctness with a theorem prover. We further introduce Autoformalization with Soft Unification, which reduces natural language ambiguity and improves formalization quality, enabling more effective use of the theorem prover. An 8B model trained on data constructed with LogicReward surpasses GPT-4o and o4-mini by 11.6\% and 2\% on natural language inference and logical reasoning tasks with simple training procedures. Further analysis shows that LogicReward enhances reasoning faithfulness, improves generalizability to unseen tasks such as math and commonsense reasoning, and provides a reliable reward signal even without ground-truth labels. We will release all data and code upon acceptance

The use of LLMs for code generation has naturally extended to code testing and evaluation. As codebases grow in size and complexity, so does the need for automated test generation. Current approaches for LLM-based test generation rely on strategies that maximize immediate coverage gain, a greedy approach that plateaus on code where reaching deep branches requires setup steps that individually yield zero new coverage. Drawing on principles of Bayesian exploration, we treat the program's branch structure as an unknown environment, and an evolving coverage map as a proxy probabilistic posterior representing what the LLM has discovered so far. Our method, CovQValue, feeds the coverage map back to the LLM, generates diverse candidate plans in parallel, and selects the most informative plan by LLM-estimated Q-values, seeking actions that balance immediate branch discovery with future reachability. Our method outperforms greedy selection on TestGenEval Lite, achieving 51-77

Theory of Mind (ToM), the ability to track others epistemic state, makes humans efficient collaborators. AI agents need the same capacity in multi agent settings, yet existing benchmarks mostly test literal ToM by asking direct belief questions. The ability act optimally on implicit beliefs in embodied environments, called functional ToM, remains largely untested. We introduce EnactToM, an evolving benchmark of 300 embodied multi-agent tasks set in a 3D household with partial observability, private information, and constrained communication. Each task is formally verified for solvability and required epistemic depth, and new tasks are generated increase difficulty as models improve. On the hard split, all seven evaluated frontier models score 0.0

Executing complex terminal tasks remains a significant challenge for open-weight LLMs, constrained by two fundamental limitations. First, high-fidelity, executable training environments are scarce: environments synthesized from real-world repositories are not diverse and scalable, while trajectories synthesized by LLMs suffer from hallucinations. Second, standard instruction tuning uses expert trajectories that rarely exhibit simple mistakes common to smaller models. This creates a distributional mismatch, leaving student models ill-equipped to recover from their own runtime failures. To bridge these gaps, we introduce TermiGen, an end-to-end pipeline for synthesizing verifiable environments and resilient expert trajectories. Termi-Gen first generates functionally valid tasks and Docker containers via an iterative multi-agent refinement loop. Subsequently, we employ a Generator-Critic protocol that actively injects errors during trajectory collection, synthesizing data rich in error-correction cycles. Fine-tuned on this TermiGen-generated dataset, our TermiGen-Qwen2.5-Coder-32B achieves a 31.3

Current jailbreaking work on large language models (LLMs) aims to elicit unsafe outputs from given prompts. However, it only focuses on single-turn jailbreaking targeting one specific query. On the contrary, the advanced LLMs are designed to handle extremely long contexts and can thus conduct multi-turn conversations. So, we propose exploring multi-turn jailbreaking, in which the jailbroken LLMs are continuously tested on more than the first-turn conversation or a single target query. This is an even more serious threat because 1) it is common for users to continue asking relevant follow-up questions to clarify certain jailbroken details, and 2) it is also possible that the initial round of jailbreaking causes the LLMs to respond to additional irrelevant questions consistently. As the first step (First draft done at June 2024) in exploring multi-turn jailbreaking, we construct a Multi-Turn Jailbreak Benchmark (MTJ-Bench) for benchmarking this setting on a series of open- and closed-source models and provide novel insights into this new safety threat. By revealing this new vulnerability, we aim to call for community efforts to build safer LLMs and pave the way for a more in-depth understanding of jailbreaking LLMs.

Empirical Risk Minimization (ERM) models often rely on spurious correlations between features and labels during the learning process, leading to shortcut learning behavior that undermines robustness generalization performance. Current research mainly targets identifying or mitigating a single shortcut; however, in real-world scenarios, cues within the data are diverse and unknown. In empirical studies, we reveal that models rely more on strong shortcuts than weak ones, with their performance under multiple shortcuts typically falling between that of an individual shortcut. To address these challenges, we propose MiMu, a novel method integrated with Transformer-based ERMs designed to Mitigate Multiple shortcut learning behavior, which incorporates self-calibration strategy and self-improvement strategy. In the source model, we first propose the self-calibration strategy to prevent the model from relying on shortcuts and make overconfident predictions. Then, we design self-improvement strategy in target model to further reduce the reliance on multiple shortcuts. The random mask strategy involves randomly masking partial attention positions to diversify the focus of target model avoiding fixation on a fixed region. Meanwhile, the adaptive attention alignment module facilitates the alignment of attention weights to the calibrated source model, without the need for post-hoc attention maps or supervision. Finally, extensive experiments conducted on Natural Language Processing (NLP) and Computer Vision (CV) demonstrate the effectiveness of MiMu in improving the robustness generalization abilities.

As AI advances in text generation, human trust in AI generated content remains constrained by biases that go beyond concerns of accuracy. This study explores how bias shapes the perception of AI versus human generated content. Through three experiments involving text rephrasing, news article summarization, and persuasive writing, we investigated how human raters respond to labeled and unlabeled content. While the raters could not differentiate the two types of texts in the blind test, they overwhelmingly favored content labeled as "Human Generated," over those labeled "AI Generated," by a preference score of over 30

Although LLMs exhibit strong reasoning capabilities, existing training methods largely depend on outcome-based feedback, which can produce correct answers with flawed reasoning. Prior work introduces supervision on intermediate steps but still lacks guarantees of logical soundness, which is crucial in high-stakes scenarios where logical consistency is paramount. To address this, we propose LogicReward, a novel reward system that guides model training by enforcing step-level logical correctness with a theorem prover. We further introduce Autoformalization with Soft Unification, which reduces natural language ambiguity and improves formalization quality, enabling more effective use of the theorem prover. An 8B model trained on data constructed with LogicReward surpasses GPT-4o and o4-mini by 11.6% and 2% on natural language inference and logical reasoning tasks with simple training procedures. Further analysis shows that LogicReward enhances reasoning faithfulness, improves generalizability to unseen tasks such as math and commonsense reasoning, and provides a reliable reward signal even without ground-truth labels. We will release all data and code at https://llm-symbol.github.io/LogicReward.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated strong performance in handling complex tasks that require both extensive knowledge and reasoning abilities. However, the existing LLM inference pipeline operates as an opaque process without explicit separation between knowledge retrieval and reasoning steps, making the model’s decision-making process unclear and disorganized. Recent research has shown that this ambiguity will lead to issues such as knowledge forgetting, which significantly impact the reliability of LLMs. In this paper, we propose a novel language model inference paradigm that decomposes the complex inference process into two distinct and clear actions: (1) memory recall : which retrieves relevant knowledge in LLM, and (2) reasoning : which performs reasoning steps based on the recalled knowledge. To facilitate this decomposition, we introduce two special tokens memory and reason, guiding the model to distinguish between steps that require knowledge retrieval and those that involve reasoning. Our experiment results show that this decomposition not only improves LLMs’ performance among utility benchmarks but also enhances interpretability during the inference process, enabling users to identify sources of error and refine model responses effectively. The code is available at: https://github.com/MingyuJ666/Disentangling-Memory-and-Reasoning.

This paper introduces RuleArena, a novel and challenging benchmark designed to evaluate the ability of large language models (LLMs) to follow complex, real-world rules in reasoning. Covering three practical domains – airline baggage fees, NBA transactions, and tax regulations – RuleArena assesses LLMs’ proficiency in handling intricate natural language instructions that demand long-context understanding, logical reasoning, and accurate mathematical computation. Two key attributes distinguish RuleArena from traditional rule-based reasoning benchmarks: (1) it extends beyond standard first-order logic representations, and (2) it is grounded in authentic, practical scenarios, providing insights into the suitability and reliability of LLMs for real-world applications. Our findings reveal several notable limitations in LLMs: (1) they struggle to identify and apply the appropriate rules, frequently becoming confused by similar but distinct regulations, (2) they cannot consistently perform accurate mathematical computations, even when they correctly identify the relevant rules, and (3) in general, they perform poorly in the benchmark. We also observe a significant performance boost when LLMs are provided with external tools for oracle math and logic operations. These results highlight significant challenges and promising research directions in advancing LLMs’ rule-guided reasoning capabilities in real-life applications. Our codes and data are publicly available on https://github.com/skyriver-2000/rulearena.

Large language models (LLMs) have shown remarkable performance on code generation tasks. A recent use case is iterative code repair, where an LLM fixes an incorrect program by rationalizing about errors and generating new code. Recent works augment the code repair process by integrating modern techniques such as chain-of-thought reasoning or distillation, but only study their benefits on high-resource languages like Python, and ignore low-resource languages like Perl. To address this gap of knowledge, we investigate the benefits of distilling code repair for both high and low resource languages to determine if the techniques that are effective in a high resource setting are also applicable in a low resource setting. Our evaluation shows that distilling the ability to repair code has language dependent benefits. To explain this behavior, we perform a further analysis and find that contrary to preexisting beliefs, the correlation between reasoning ability and code correction ability is weak. We hypothesize this weak correlation is magnified in low-resource settings where base models lack deep knowledge of a programming language, leading to wavering benefits of code repair.