Recent advancements in large language models have significantly improved their reasoning abilities, particularly through techniques involving search and backtracking. Backtracking naturally scales test-time compute by enabling sequential, linearized exploration via long chain-of-thought (CoT) generation. However, this is not the only strategy for scaling test-time compute: parallel sampling with best-of-n selection provides an alternative that generates diverse solutions simultaneously. Despite the growing adoption of sequential search, its advantages over parallel sampling--especially under a fixed compute budget remain poorly understood. In this paper, we systematically compare these two approaches on two challenging reasoning tasks: CountDown and Sudoku. Surprisingly, we find that sequential search underperforms parallel sampling on CountDown but outperforms it on Sudoku, suggesting that backtracking is not universally beneficial. We identify two factors that can cause backtracking to degrade performance: (1) training on fixed search traces can lock models into suboptimal strategies, and (2) explicit CoT supervision can discourage "implicit" (non-verbalized) reasoning. Extending our analysis to reinforcement learning (RL), we show that models with backtracking capabilities benefit significantly from RL fine-tuning, while models without backtracking see limited, mixed gains. Together, these findings challenge the assumption that backtracking universally enhances LLM reasoning, instead revealing a complex interaction between task structure, training data, model scale, and learning paradigm.
Despite advances in Preference Alignment (PA) for Large Language Models (LLMs), mainstream methods like Reinforcement Learning with Human Feedback (RLHF) face notable challenges. These approaches require high-quality datasets of positive preference examples, which are costly to obtain and computationally intensive due to training instability, limiting their use in low-resource scenarios. LLM unlearning technique presents a promising alternative, by directly removing the influence of negative examples. However, current research has primarily focused on empirical validation, lacking systematic quantitative analysis. To bridge this gap, we propose a framework to explore the relationship between PA and LLM unlearning. Specifically, we introduce a bi-level optimization-based method to quantify the impact of unlearning specific negative examples on PA performance. Our analysis reveals that not all negative examples contribute equally to alignment improvement when unlearned, and the effect varies significantly across examples. Building on this insight, we pose a crucial question: how can we optimally select and weight negative examples for unlearning to maximize PA performance? To answer this, we propose a framework called Unlearning to Align (U2A), which leverages bi-level optimization to efficiently select and unlearn examples for optimal PA performance. We validate the proposed method through extensive experiments, with results confirming its effectiveness.
Large reasoning models (LRMs) have recently shown impressive capabilities in complex reasoning by leveraging increased test-time computation and exhibiting behaviors akin to human-like deliberation. Despite these advances, it remains an open question whether LRMs are better calibrated - particularly in their verbalized confidence - compared to instruction-tuned counterparts. In this paper, we investigate the calibration properties of LRMs trained via supervised fine-tuning distillation on long reasoning traces (henceforth SFT reasoning models) and outcome-based reinforcement learning for reasoning (henceforth RL reasoning models) across diverse domains. Our findings reveal that LRMs significantly outperform instruction-tuned models on complex reasoning tasks in both accuracy and confidence calibration. In contrast, we find surprising trends in the domain of factuality in particular. On factuality tasks, while Deepseek-R1 shows strong calibration behavior, smaller QwQ-32B shows no improvement over instruct models; moreover, SFT reasoning models display worse calibration (greater overconfidence) compared to instruct models. Our results provide evidence for a potentially critical role of reasoning-oriented RL training in improving LLMs' capacity for generating trustworthy, self-aware outputs.
We find that the response length of reasoning LLMs, whether trained by reinforcement learning or supervised learning, drastically increases for ill-posed questions with missing premises (MiP), ending up with redundant and ineffective thinking. This newly introduced scenario exacerbates the general overthinking issue to a large extent, which we name as the MiP-Overthinking. Such failures are against the ``test-time scaling law'' but have been widely observed on multiple datasets we curated with MiP, indicating the harm of cheap overthinking and a lack of critical thinking. Surprisingly, LLMs not specifically trained for reasoning exhibit much better performance on the MiP scenario, producing much shorter responses that quickly identify ill-posed queries. This implies a critical flaw of the current training recipe for reasoning LLMs, which does not encourage efficient thinking adequately, leading to the abuse of thinking patterns. To further investigate the reasons behind such failures, we conduct fine-grained analyses of the reasoning length, overthinking patterns, and location of critical thinking on different types of LLMs. Moreover, our extended ablation study reveals that the overthinking is contagious through the distillation of reasoning models' responses. These results improve the understanding of overthinking and shed novel insights into mitigating the problem.
Recent advances in automated theorem proving (ATP) through LLMs have highlighted the potential of formal reasoning with Lean 4 codes. However, ATP has not yet be revolutionized by the recent posttraining scaling as demonstrated by Open AI O1/O3 and Deepseek R1. In this work, we investigate the entire posttraining of ATP, aiming to align it with breakthroughs in reasoning models in natural languages. To begin, we continual train current ATP models with a hybrid dataset, which consists of numerous statement-proof pairs, and additional data aimed at incorporating cognitive behaviors that emulate human reasoning and hypothesis refinement. Next, we explore reinforcement learning with the use of outcome reward returned by Lean 4 compiler. Through our designed continual training and reinforcement learning processes, we have successfully improved existing formal provers, including both DeepSeek-Prover-v1.5 and Goedel-Prover, achieving state-of-the-art performance in the field of whole-proof generation. For example, we achieve a 59.8% pass rate (pass@32) on MiniF2F. This is an on-going project and we will progressively update our findings, release our data and training details.
Geometric Machine Learning (GML) has shown that respecting non-Euclidean geometry in data spaces can significantly improve performance over naive Euclidean assumptions. In parallel, Quantum Machine Learning (QML) has emerged as a promising paradigm that leverages superposition, entanglement, and interference within quantum state manifolds for learning tasks. This paper offers a unifying perspective by casting QML as a specialized yet more expressive branch of GML. We argue that quantum states, whether pure or mixed, reside on curved manifolds (e.g., projective Hilbert spaces or density-operator manifolds), mirroring how covariance matrices inhabit the manifold of symmetric positive definite (SPD) matrices or how image sets occupy Grassmann manifolds. However, QML also benefits from purely quantum properties, such as entanglement-induced curvature, that can yield richer kernel structures and more nuanced data embeddings. We illustrate these ideas with published and newly discussed results, including hybrid classical -quantum pipelines for diabetic foot ulcer classification and structural health monitoring. Despite near-term hardware limitations that constrain purely quantum solutions, hybrid architectures already demonstrate tangible benefits by combining classical manifold-based feature extraction with quantum embeddings. We present a detailed mathematical treatment of the geometrical underpinnings of quantum states, emphasizing parallels to classical Riemannian geometry and manifold-based optimization. Finally, we outline open research challenges and future directions, including Quantum Large Language Models (LLMs), quantum reinforcement learning, and emerging hardware approaches, demonstrating how synergizing GML and QML principles can unlock the next generation of machine intelligence.
While large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated exceptional capabilities in challenging tasks such as mathematical reasoning, existing methods to enhance reasoning ability predominantly rely on supervised fine-tuning (SFT) followed by reinforcement learning (RL) on reasoning-specific data after pre-training. However, these approaches critically depend on external supervisions--such as human labelled reasoning traces, verified golden answers, or pre-trained reward models--which limits scalability and practical applicability. In this work, we propose Entropy Minimized Policy Optimization (EMPO), which makes an early attempt at fully unsupervised LLM reasoning incentivization. EMPO does not require any supervised information for incentivizing reasoning capabilities (i.e., neither verifiable reasoning traces, problems with golden answers, nor additional pre-trained reward models). By continuously minimizing the predictive entropy of LLMs on unlabeled user queries in a latent semantic space, EMPO enables purely self-supervised evolution of reasoning capabilities with strong flexibility and practicality. Our experiments demonstrate competitive performance of EMPO on both mathematical reasoning and free-form commonsense reasoning tasks. Specifically, without any supervised signals, EMPO boosts the accuracy of Qwen2.5-Math-7B Base from 30.7\% to 48.1\% on mathematical benchmarks and improves truthfulness accuracy of Qwen2.5-7B Instruct from 87.16\% to 97.25\% on TruthfulQA.
Chain-of-Thought (CoT) enhances an LLM's ability to perform complex reasoning tasks, but it also introduces new security issues. In this work, we present ShadowCoT, a novel backdoor attack framework that targets the internal reasoning mechanism of LLMs. Unlike prior token-level or prompt-based attacks, ShadowCoT directly manipulates the model's cognitive reasoning path, enabling it to hijack multi-step reasoning chains and produce logically coherent but adversarial outcomes. By conditioning on internal reasoning states, ShadowCoT learns to recognize and selectively disrupt key reasoning steps, effectively mounting a self-reflective cognitive attack within the target model. Our approach introduces a lightweight yet effective multi-stage injection pipeline, which selectively rewires attention pathways and perturbs intermediate representations with minimal parameter overhead (only 0.15% updated). ShadowCoT further leverages reinforcement learning and reasoning chain pollution (RCP) to autonomously synthesize stealthy adversarial CoTs that remain undetectable to advanced defenses. Extensive experiments across diverse reasoning benchmarks and LLMs show that ShadowCoT consistently achieves high Attack Success Rate (94.4%) and Hijacking Success Rate (88.4%) while preserving benign performance. These results reveal an emergent class of cognition-level threats and highlight the urgent need for defenses beyond shallow surface-level consistency.
Despite significant advancements in large language models (LLMs), a major drawback of reasoning models is their enormous token usage, which increases computational cost, resource requirements, and response time. In this work, we revisit the core principles of reinforcement learning (RL) and, through mathematical analysis, demonstrate that the tendency to generate lengthy responses arises inherently from RL-based optimization during training. This finding questions the prevailing assumption that longer responses inherently improve reasoning accuracy. Instead, we uncover a natural correlation between conciseness and accuracy that has been largely overlooked. Moreover, we show that introducing a secondary phase of RL post-training, using a small set of problems and limited resources, can significantly reduce a model's chain of thought while maintaining or even enhancing accuracy. Finally, we validate our conclusions through extensive experimental results.
Discovering efficient algorithms for solving complex problems has been an outstanding challenge in mathematics and computer science, requiring substantial human expertise over the years. Recent advancements in evolutionary search with large language models (LLMs) have shown promise in accelerating the discovery of algorithms across various domains, particularly in mathematics and optimization. However, existing approaches treat the LLM as a static generator, missing the opportunity to update the model with the signal obtained from evolutionary exploration. In this work, we propose to augment LLM-based evolutionary search by continuously refining the search operator - the LLM - through reinforcement learning (RL) fine-tuning. Our method leverages evolutionary search as an exploration strategy to discover improved algorithms, while RL optimizes the LLM policy based on these discoveries. Our experiments on three combinatorial optimization tasks - bin packing, traveling salesman, and the flatpack problem - show that combining RL and evolutionary search improves discovery efficiency of improved algorithms, showcasing the potential of RL-enhanced evolutionary strategies to assist computer scientists and mathematicians for more efficient algorithm design.
Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) has emerged as a important paradigm for aligning large language models (LLMs) with human preferences during post-training. This framework typically involves two stages: first, training a reward model on human preference data, followed by optimizing the language model using reinforcement learning algorithms. However, current RLHF approaches may constrained by two limitations. First, existing RLHF frameworks often rely on Bradley-Terry models to assign scalar rewards based on pairwise comparisons of individual responses. However, this approach imposes significant challenges on reward model (RM), as the inherent variability in prompt-response pairs across different contexts demands robust calibration capabilities from the RM. Second, reward models are typically initialized from generative foundation models, such as pre-trained or supervised fine-tuned models, despite the fact that reward models perform discriminative tasks, creating a mismatch. This paper introduces Pairwise-RL, a RLHF framework that addresses these challenges through a combination of generative reward modeling and a pairwise proximal policy optimization (PPO) algorithm. Pairwise-RL unifies reward model training and its application during reinforcement learning within a consistent pairwise paradigm, leveraging generative modeling techniques to enhance reward model performance and score calibration. Experimental evaluations demonstrate that Pairwise-RL outperforms traditional RLHF frameworks across both internal evaluation datasets and standard public benchmarks, underscoring its effectiveness in improving alignment and model behavior.
Efficiently leveraging of the capabilities of contemporary large language models (LLMs) is increasingly challenging, particularly when direct fine-tuning is expensive and often impractical. Existing training-free methods, including manually or automated designed workflows, typically demand substantial human effort or yield suboptimal results. This paper proposes Weak-for-Strong Harnessing (W4S), a novel framework that customizes smaller, cost-efficient language models to design and optimize workflows for harnessing stronger models. W4S formulates workflow design as a multi-turn markov decision process and introduces reinforcement learning for agentic workflow optimization (RLAO) to train a weak meta-agent. Through iterative interaction with the environment, the meta-agent learns to design increasingly effective workflows without manual intervention. Empirical results demonstrate the superiority of W4S that our 7B meta-agent, trained with just one GPU hour, outperforms the strongest baseline by 2.9% ~ 24.6% across eleven benchmarks, successfully elevating the performance of state-of-the-art models such as GPT-3.5-Turbo and GPT-4o. Notably, W4S exhibits strong generalization capabilities across both seen and unseen tasks, offering an efficient, high-performing alternative to directly fine-tuning strong models.
Recent advancements in large language models (LLMs) have revolutionized their ability to handle single-turn tasks, yet real-world applications demand sophisticated multi-turn interactions. This survey provides a comprehensive review of recent advancements in evaluating and enhancing multi-turn interactions in LLMs. Focusing on task-specific scenarios, from instruction following in diverse domains such as math and coding to complex conversational engagements in roleplay, healthcare, education, and even adversarial jailbreak settings, we systematically examine the challenges of maintaining context, coherence, fairness, and responsiveness over prolonged dialogues. The paper organizes current benchmarks and datasets into coherent categories that reflect the evolving landscape of multi-turn dialogue evaluation. In addition, we review a range of enhancement methodologies under multi-turn settings, including model-centric strategies (contextual learning, supervised fine-tuning, reinforcement learning, and new architectures), external integration approaches (memory-augmented, retrieval-based methods, and knowledge graph), and agent-based techniques for collaborative interactions. Finally, we discuss open challenges and propose future directions for research to further advance the robustness and effectiveness of multi-turn interactions in LLMs. Related resources and papers are available at https://github.com/yubol-cmu/Awesome-Multi-Turn-LLMs.
Large language models (LLMs) have shown promising performance in software vulnerability detection (SVD), yet their reasoning capabilities remain unreliable. Existing approaches relying on chain-of-thought (CoT) struggle to provide relevant and actionable security assessments. Additionally, effective SVD requires not only generating coherent reasoning but also differentiating between well-founded and misleading yet plausible security assessments, an aspect overlooked in prior work. To this end, we introduce R2Vul, a novel approach that distills structured reasoning into small LLMs using reinforcement learning from AI feedback (RLAIF). Through RLAIF, R2Vul enables LLMs to produce structured, security-aware reasoning that is actionable and reliable while explicitly learning to distinguish valid assessments from misleading ones. We evaluate R2Vul across five languages against SAST tools, CoT, instruction tuning, and classification-based baselines. Our results show that R2Vul with structured reasoning distillation enables a 1.5B student LLM to rival larger models while improving generalization to out-of-distribution vulnerabilities. Beyond model improvements, we contribute a large-scale, multilingual preference dataset featuring structured reasoning to support future research in SVD.
Automated Program Repair tools are developed for generating feedback and suggesting a repair method for erroneous code. State of the art (SOTA) code repair methods rely on data-driven approaches and often fail to deliver solution for complicated programming questions. To interpret the natural language of unprecedented programming problems, using Large Language Models (LLMs) for code-feedback generation is crucial. LLMs generate more comprehensible feedback than compiler-generated error messages, and Reinforcement Learning with Human Feedback (RLHF) further enhances quality by integrating human-in-the-loop which helps novice students to lean programming from scratch interactively. We are applying RLHF fine-tuning technique for an expected Socratic response such as a question with hint to solve the programming issue. We are proposing code feedback generation tool by fine-tuning LLM with RLHF, Automated Code Evaluation with RLHF (ACE-RLHF), combining two open-source LLM models with two different SOTA optimization techniques. The quality of feedback is evaluated on two benchmark datasets containing basic and competition-level programming questions where the later is proposed by us. We achieved 2-5% higher accuracy than RL-free SOTA techniques using Llama-3-7B-Proximal-policy optimization in automated evaluation and similar or slightly higher accuracy compared to reward model-free RL with AI Feedback (RLAIF). We achieved almost 40% higher accuracy with GPT-3.5 Best-of-n optimization while performing manual evaluation.
Recently, Large Language Models (LLMs) have rapidly evolved, approaching Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) while benefiting from large-scale reinforcement learning to enhance Human Alignment (HA) and Reasoning. Recent reward-based optimization algorithms, such as Proximal Policy Optimization (PPO) and Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO) have achieved significant performance on reasoning tasks, whereas preference-based optimization algorithms such as Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) significantly improve the performance of LLMs on human alignment. However, despite the strong performance of reward-based optimization methods in alignment tasks , they remain vulnerable to reward hacking. Furthermore, preference-based algorithms (such as Online DPO) haven't yet matched the performance of reward-based optimization algorithms (like PPO) on reasoning tasks, making their exploration in this specific area still a worthwhile pursuit. Motivated by these challenges, we propose the Trust Region Preference Approximation (TRPA) algorithm, which integrates rule-based optimization with preference-based optimization for reasoning tasks. As a preference-based algorithm, TRPA naturally eliminates the reward hacking issue. TRPA constructs preference levels using predefined rules, forms corresponding preference pairs, and leverages a novel optimization algorithm for RL training with a theoretical monotonic improvement guarantee. Experimental results demonstrate that TRPA not only achieves competitive performance on reasoning tasks but also exhibits robust stability. The code of this paper are released and updating on https://github.com/XueruiSu/Trust-Region-Preference-Approximation.git.
Competitive Pok\'emon Singles (CPS) is a popular strategy game where players learn to exploit their opponent based on imperfect information in battles that can last more than one hundred stochastic turns. AI research in CPS has been led by heuristic tree search and online self-play, but the game may also create a platform to study adaptive policies trained offline on large datasets. We develop a pipeline to reconstruct the first-person perspective of an agent from logs saved from the third-person perspective of a spectator, thereby unlocking a dataset of real human battles spanning more than a decade that grows larger every day. This dataset enables a black-box approach where we train large sequence models to adapt to their opponent based solely on their input trajectory while selecting moves without explicit search of any kind. We study a progression from imitation learning to offline RL and offline fine-tuning on self-play data in the hardcore competitive setting of Pok\'emon's four oldest (and most partially observed) game generations. The resulting agents outperform a recent LLM Agent approach and a strong heuristic search engine. While playing anonymously in online battles against humans, our best agents climb to rankings inside the top 10% of active players.
Learning open-vocabulary physical skills for simulated agents presents a significant challenge in artificial intelligence. Current reinforcement learning approaches face critical limitations: manually designed rewards lack scalability across diverse tasks, while demonstration-based methods struggle to generalize beyond their training distribution. We introduce GROVE, a generalized reward framework that enables open-vocabulary physical skill learning without manual engineering or task-specific demonstrations. Our key insight is that Large Language Models(LLMs) and Vision Language Models(VLMs) provide complementary guidance -- LLMs generate precise physical constraints capturing task requirements, while VLMs evaluate motion semantics and naturalness. Through an iterative design process, VLM-based feedback continuously refines LLM-generated constraints, creating a self-improving reward system. To bridge the domain gap between simulation and natural images, we develop Pose2CLIP, a lightweight mapper that efficiently projects agent poses directly into semantic feature space without computationally expensive rendering. Extensive experiments across diverse embodiments and learning paradigms demonstrate GROVE's effectiveness, achieving 22.2% higher motion naturalness and 25.7% better task completion scores while training 8.4x faster than previous methods. These results establish a new foundation for scalable physical skill acquisition in simulated environments.
Syllogistic reasoning is a fundamental aspect of legal decision-making, enabling logical conclusions by connecting general legal principles with specific case facts. Although existing large language models (LLMs) can generate responses to legal questions, they fail to perform explicit syllogistic reasoning, often producing implicit and unstructured answers that lack explainability and trustworthiness. To address this limitation, we propose SyLeR, a novel framework that empowers LLMs to engage in explicit syllogistic legal reasoning. SyLeR integrates a tree-structured hierarchical retrieval mechanism to effectively combine relevant legal statutes and precedent cases, forming comprehensive major premises. This is followed by a two-stage fine-tuning process: supervised fine-tuning warm-up establishes a foundational understanding of syllogistic reasoning, while reinforcement learning with a structure-aware reward mechanism refines the ability of the model to generate diverse logically sound and well-structured reasoning paths. We conducted extensive experiments across various dimensions, including in-domain and cross-domain user groups (legal laypersons and practitioners), multiple languages (Chinese and French), and different LLM backbones (legal-specific and open-domain LLMs). The results show that SyLeR significantly improves response accuracy and consistently delivers explicit, explainable, and trustworthy legal reasoning.
Understanding how humans collaborate and communicate in teams is essential for improving human-agent teaming and AI-assisted decision-making. However, relying solely on data from large-scale user studies is impractical due to logistical, ethical, and practical constraints, necessitating synthetic models of multiple diverse human behaviors. Recently, agents powered by Large Language Models (LLMs) have been shown to emulate human-like behavior in social settings. But, obtaining a large set of diverse behaviors requires manual effort in the form of designing prompts. On the other hand, Quality Diversity (QD) optimization has been shown to be capable of generating diverse Reinforcement Learning (RL) agent behavior. In this work, we combine QD optimization with LLM-powered agents to iteratively search for prompts that generate diverse team behavior in a long-horizon, multi-step collaborative environment. We first show, through a human-subjects experiment (n=54 participants), that humans exhibit diverse coordination and communication behavior in this domain. We then show that our approach can effectively replicate trends from human teaming data and also capture behaviors that are not easily observed without collecting large amounts of data. Our findings highlight the combination of QD and LLM-powered agents as an effective tool for studying teaming and communication strategies in multi-agent collaboration.
We present a novel approach for training small language models for reasoning-intensive document ranking that combines knowledge distillation with reinforcement learning optimization. While existing methods often rely on expensive human annotations or large black-box language models, our methodology leverages web data and a teacher LLM to automatically generate high-quality training examples with relevance explanations. By framing document ranking as a reinforcement learning problem and incentivizing explicit reasoning capabilities, we train a compact 3B parameter language model that achieves state-of-the-art performance on the BRIGHT benchmark. Our model ranks third on the leaderboard while using substantially fewer parameters than other approaches, outperforming models that are over 20 times larger. Through extensive experiments, we demonstrate that generating explanations during inference, rather than directly predicting relevance scores, enables more effective reasoning with smaller language models. The self-supervised nature of our method offers a scalable and interpretable solution for modern information retrieval systems.
Generating long, coherent text remains a challenge for large language models (LLMs), as they lack hierarchical planning and structured organization in discourse generation. We introduce Structural Alignment, a novel method that aligns LLMs with human-like discourse structures to enhance long-form text generation. By integrating linguistically grounded discourse frameworks into reinforcement learning, our approach guides models to produce coherent and well-organized outputs. We employ a dense reward scheme within a Proximal Policy Optimization framework, assigning fine-grained, token-level rewards based on the discourse distinctiveness relative to human writing. Two complementary reward models are evaluated: the first improves readability by scoring surface-level textual features to provide explicit structuring, while the second reinforces deeper coherence and rhetorical sophistication by analyzing global discourse patterns through hierarchical discourse motifs, outperforming both standard and RLHF-enhanced models in tasks such as essay generation and long-document summarization. All training data and code will be publicly shared at https://github.com/minnesotanlp/struct_align.
Reasoning-Oriented Reinforcement Learning (RORL) enhances the reasoning ability of Large Language Models (LLMs). However, due to the sparsity of rewards in RORL, effective training is highly dependent on the selection of problems of appropriate difficulty. Although curriculum learning attempts to address this by adjusting difficulty, it often relies on static schedules, and even recent online filtering methods lack theoretical grounding and a systematic understanding of their effectiveness. In this work, we theoretically and empirically show that curating the batch with the problems that the training model achieves intermediate accuracy on the fly can maximize the effectiveness of RORL training, namely balanced online difficulty filtering. We first derive that the lower bound of the KL divergence between the initial and the optimal policy can be expressed with the variance of the sampled accuracy. Building on those insights, we show that balanced filtering can maximize the lower bound, leading to better performance. Experimental results across five challenging math reasoning benchmarks show that balanced online filtering yields an additional 10% in AIME and 4% improvements in average over plain GRPO. Moreover, further analysis shows the gains in sample efficiency and training time efficiency, exceeding the maximum reward of plain GRPO within 60% training time and the volume of the training set.
Effective conversational agents must be able to personalize their behavior to suit a user's preferences, personality, and attributes, whether they are assisting with writing tasks or operating in domains like education or healthcare. Current training methods like Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) prioritize helpfulness and safety but fall short in fostering truly empathetic, adaptive, and personalized interactions. Traditional approaches to personalization often rely on extensive user history, limiting their effectiveness for new or context-limited users. To overcome these limitations, we propose to incorporate an intrinsic motivation to improve the conversational agents's model of the user as an additional reward alongside multi-turn RLHF. This reward mechanism encourages the agent to actively elicit user traits by optimizing conversations to increase the accuracy of its user model. Consequently, the policy agent can deliver more personalized interactions through obtaining more information about the user. We applied our method both education and fitness settings, where LLMs teach concepts or recommend personalized strategies based on users' hidden learning style or lifestyle attributes. Using LLM-simulated users, our approach outperformed a multi-turn RLHF baseline in revealing information about the users' preferences, and adapting to them.
Generalizable alignment is a core challenge for deploying Large Language Models (LLMs) safely in real-world NLP applications. Current alignment methods, including Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF), often fail to guarantee constraint satisfaction outside their training distribution due to their reliance on implicit, post-hoc preferences. Inspired by a paradigm shift to first curate data before tuning, we introduce a new framework for safe language alignment that learns natural language constraints from positive and negative demonstrations as a primary step. From inferring both a task-specific reward function and latent constraint functions, our approach fosters adaptation to novel safety requirements and robust generalization under domain shifts and adversarial inputs. We formalize the framework within a Constrained Markov Decision Process (CMDP) and validate it via a text-based navigation environment, demonstrating safe adaptation to changing danger zones. Our experiments show fewer violations upon domain shift when following a safe navigation path, and we achieve zero violations by applying learned constraints to a distilled BERT model as a fine-tuning technique. This work offers a promising path toward building safety-critical and more generalizable LLMs for practical NLP settings.
Large Language Models (LLMs) equipped with web search capabilities have demonstrated impressive potential for deep research tasks. However, current approaches predominantly rely on either manually engineered prompts (prompt engineering-based) with brittle performance or reinforcement learning within controlled Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) environments (RAG-based) that fail to capture the complexities of real-world interaction. In this paper, we introduce DeepResearcher, the first comprehensive framework for end-to-end training of LLM-based deep research agents through scaling reinforcement learning (RL) in real-world environments with authentic web search interactions. Unlike RAG-based approaches that assume all necessary information exists within a fixed corpus, our method trains agents to navigate the noisy, unstructured, and dynamic nature of the open web. We implement a specialized multi-agent architecture where browsing agents extract relevant information from various webpage structures and overcoming significant technical challenges. Extensive experiments on open-domain research tasks demonstrate that DeepResearcher achieves substantial improvements of up to 28.9 points over prompt engineering-based baselines and up to 7.2 points over RAG-based RL agents. Our qualitative analysis reveals emergent cognitive behaviors from end-to-end RL training, including the ability to formulate plans, cross-validate information from multiple sources, engage in self-reflection to redirect research, and maintain honesty when unable to find definitive answers. Our results highlight that end-to-end training in real-world web environments is not merely an implementation detail but a fundamental requirement for developing robust research capabilities aligned with real-world applications. We release DeepResearcher at https://github.com/GAIR-NLP/DeepResearcher.
In this work, we present VARGPT-v1.1, an advanced unified visual autoregressive model that builds upon our previous framework VARGPT. The model preserves the dual paradigm of next-token prediction for visual understanding and next-scale generation for image synthesis. Specifically, VARGPT-v1.1 integrates: (1) a novel training strategy combining iterative visual instruction tuning with reinforcement learning through Direct Preference Optimization (DPO), (2) an expanded training corpus containing 8.3M visual-generative instruction pairs, (3) an upgraded language model backbone using Qwen2, (4) enhanced image generation resolution, and (5) emergent image editing capabilities without architectural modifications. These advancements enable VARGPT-v1.1 to achieve state-of-the-art performance in multimodal understanding and text-to-image instruction-following tasks, demonstrating significant improvements in both comprehension and generation metrics. Notably, through visual instruction tuning, the model acquires image editing functionality while maintaining architectural consistency with its predecessor, revealing the potential for unified visual understanding, generation, and editing. Our findings suggest that well-designed unified visual autoregressive models can effectively adopt flexible training strategies from large language models (LLMs), exhibiting promising scalability. The codebase and model weights are publicly available at https://github.com/VARGPT-family/VARGPT-v1.1.
Reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) has emerged as a key technique for aligning the output of large language models (LLMs) with human preferences. To learn the reward function, most existing RLHF algorithms use the Bradley-Terry model, which relies on assumptions about human preferences that may not reflect the complexity and variability of real-world judgments. In this paper, we propose a robust algorithm to enhance the performance of existing approaches under such reward model misspecifications. Theoretically, our algorithm reduces the variance of reward and policy estimators, leading to improved regret bounds. Empirical evaluations on LLM benchmark datasets demonstrate that the proposed algorithm consistently outperforms existing methods, with 77-81% of responses being favored over baselines on the Anthropic Helpful and Harmless dataset.
The task of issue resolving is to modify a codebase to generate a patch that addresses a given issue. However, existing benchmarks, such as SWE-bench, focus almost exclusively on Python, making them insufficient for evaluating Large Language Models (LLMs) across diverse software ecosystems. To address this, we introduce a multilingual issue-resolving benchmark, called Multi-SWE-bench, covering Java, TypeScript, JavaScript, Go, Rust, C, and C++. It includes a total of 1,632 high-quality instances, which were carefully annotated from 2,456 candidates by 68 expert annotators, ensuring that the benchmark can provide an accurate and reliable evaluation. Based on Multi-SWE-bench, we evaluate a series of state-of-the-art models using three representative methods (Agentless, SWE-agent, and OpenHands) and present a comprehensive analysis with key empirical insights. In addition, we launch a Multi-SWE-RL open-source community, aimed at building large-scale reinforcement learning (RL) training datasets for issue-resolving tasks. As an initial contribution, we release a set of 4,723 well-structured instances spanning seven programming languages, laying a solid foundation for RL research in this domain. More importantly, we open-source our entire data production pipeline, along with detailed tutorials, encouraging the open-source community to continuously contribute and expand the dataset. We envision our Multi-SWE-bench and the ever-growing Multi-SWE-RL community as catalysts for advancing RL toward its full potential, bringing us one step closer to the dawn of AGI.
The legal mathematical reasoning ability of LLMs is crucial when applying them to real-world scenarios, as it directly affects the credibility of the LLM. While existing legal LLMs can perform general judicial question answering, their legal mathematical reasoning capabilities have not been trained. Open-domain reasoning models, though able to generate detailed calculation steps, do not follow the reasoning logic required for legal scenarios. Additionally, there is currently a lack of legal mathematical reasoning datasets to help validate and enhance LLMs' reasoning abilities in legal contexts. To address these issues, we propose the first Chinese legal Mathematical Reasoning Dataset, LexNum, which includes three common legal mathematical reasoning scenarios: economic compensation, work injury compensation, and traffic accident compensation. Based on LexNum, we tested the performance of existing legal LLMs and reasoning LLMs, and introduced LexPam, a reinforcement learning algorithm guided by legal procedural awareness to train LLMs, enhancing their mathematical reasoning abilities in legal scenarios. Experiments on tasks in the three legal scenarios show that the performance of existing legal LLMs and reasoning models in legal mathematical reasoning tasks is unsatisfactory. LexPam can enhance the LLM's ability in these tasks.