Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated strong potential in clinical question answering, with recent multi-agent frameworks further improving diagnostic accuracy via collaborative reasoning. However, we identify a recurring issue of Silent Agreement, where agents prematurely converge on diagnoses without sufficient critical analysis, particularly in complex or ambiguous cases. We present a new concept called Catfish Agent, a role-specialized LLM designed to inject structured dissent and counter silent agreement. Inspired by the ``catfish effect'' in organizational psychology, the Catfish Agent is designed to challenge emerging consensus to stimulate deeper reasoning. We formulate two mechanisms to encourage effective and context-aware interventions: (i) a complexity-aware intervention that modulates agent engagement based on case difficulty, and (ii) a tone-calibrated intervention articulated to balance critique and collaboration. Evaluations on nine medical Q&A and three medical VQA benchmarks show that our approach consistently outperforms both single- and multi-agent LLMs frameworks, including leading commercial models such as GPT-4o and DeepSeek-R1.
Automating robust hypothesis generation in open environments is pivotal for AI cognition. We introduce a novel framework integrating a multi-agent system, powered by Large Language Models (LLMs), with Inductive Logic Programming (ILP). Our system's LLM agents autonomously define a structured symbolic vocabulary (predicates) and relational templates , i.e., \emph{language bias} directly from raw textual data. This automated symbolic grounding (the construction of the language bias), traditionally an expert-driven bottleneck for ILP, then guides the transformation of text into facts for an ILP solver, which inductively learns interpretable rules. This approach overcomes traditional ILP's reliance on predefined symbolic structures and the noise-sensitivity of pure LLM methods. Extensive experiments in diverse, challenging scenarios validate superior performance, paving a new path for automated, explainable, and verifiable hypothesis generation.
With the rapid advancement of post-training techniques for reasoning and information seeking, large language models (LLMs) can incorporate a large quantity of retrieved knowledge to solve complex tasks. However, the limited context window of LLMs obstructs scaling the amount of external knowledge input, prohibiting further improvement, especially for tasks requiring significant amount of external knowledge. Existing context window extension methods inevitably cause information loss. LLM-based multi-agent methods emerge as a new paradigm to handle massive input in a distributional manner, where we identify two core bottlenecks in existing knowledge synchronization and reasoning processes. In this work, we develop a multi-agent framework, $\textbf{ExtAgents}$, to overcome the bottlenecks and enable better scalability in inference-time knowledge integration without longer-context training. Benchmarked with our enhanced multi-hop question answering test, $\textbf{$\boldsymbol{\infty}$Bench+}$, and other public test sets including long survey generation, ExtAgents significantly enhances the performance over existing non-training methods with the same amount of external knowledge input, regardless of whether it falls $\textit{within or exceeds the context window}$. Moreover, the method maintains high efficiency due to high parallelism. Further study in the coordination of LLM agents on increasing external knowledge input could benefit real-world applications.
Focused Ultrasound Ablation Surgery (FUAS) has emerged as a promising non-invasive therapeutic modality, valued for its safety and precision. Nevertheless, its clinical implementation entails intricate tasks such as multimodal image interpretation, personalized dose planning, and real-time intraoperative decision-making processes that demand intelligent assistance to improve efficiency and reliability. We introduce FUAS-Agents, an autonomous agent system that leverages the multimodal understanding and tool-using capabilities of large language models (LLMs). By integrating patient profiles and MRI data, FUAS-Agents orchestrates a suite of specialized medical AI tools, including segmentation, treatment dose prediction, and clinical guideline retrieval, to generate personalized treatment plans comprising MRI image, dose parameters, and therapeutic strategies. We evaluate the system in a uterine fibroid treatment scenario. Human assessment by four senior FUAS experts indicates that 82.5%, 82.5%, 87.5%, and 97.5% of the generated plans were rated 4 or above (on a 5-point scale) in terms of completeness, accuracy, fluency, and clinical compliance, respectively. These results demonstrate the potential of LLM-driven agents in enhancing decision-making across complex clinical workflows, and exemplify a translational paradigm that combines general-purpose models with specialized expert systems to solve practical challenges in vertical healthcare domains.
Effective engagement by large language models (LLMs) requires adapting responses to users' sociodemographic characteristics, such as age, occupation, and education level. While many real-world applications leverage dialogue history for contextualization, existing evaluations of LLMs' behavioral adaptation often focus on single-turn prompts. In this paper, we propose a framework to evaluate LLM adaptation when attributes are introduced either (1) explicitly via user profiles in the prompt or (2) implicitly through multi-turn dialogue history. We assess the consistency of model behavior across these modalities. Using a multi-agent pipeline, we construct a synthetic dataset pairing dialogue histories with distinct user profiles and employ questions from the Value Survey Module (VSM 2013) (Hofstede and Hofstede, 2016) to probe value expression. Our findings indicate that most models adjust their expressed values in response to demographic changes, particularly in age and education level, but consistency varies. Models with stronger reasoning capabilities demonstrate greater alignment, indicating the importance of reasoning in robust sociodemographic adaptation.
Patent claims define the scope of protection for an invention. If there are ambiguities in a claim, it is rejected by the patent office. In the US, this is referred to as indefiniteness (35 U.S.C {\S} 112(b)) and is among the most frequent reasons for patent application rejection. The development of automatic methods for patent definiteness examination has the potential to make patent drafting and examination more efficient, but no annotated dataset has been published to date. We introduce PEDANTIC (\underline{P}at\underline{e}nt \underline{D}efiniteness Ex\underline{a}mi\underline{n}a\underline{ti}on \underline{C}orpus), a novel dataset of 14k US patent claims from patent applications relating to Natural Language Processing (NLP), annotated with reasons for indefiniteness. We construct PEDANTIC using a fully automatic pipeline that retrieves office action documents from the USPTO and uses Large Language Models (LLMs) to extract the reasons for indefiniteness. A human validation study confirms the pipeline's accuracy in generating high-quality annotations. To gain insight beyond binary classification metrics, we implement an LLM-as-Judge evaluation that compares the free-form reasoning of every model-cited reason with every examiner-cited reason. We show that LLM agents based on Qwen 2.5 32B and 72B struggle to outperform logistic regression baselines on definiteness prediction, even though they often correctly identify the underlying reasons. PEDANTIC provides a valuable resource for patent AI researchers, enabling the development of advanced examination models. We will publicly release the dataset and code.
Recent interest in Multi-Agent Systems of Large Language Models (MAS LLMs) has led to an increase in frameworks leveraging multiple LLMs to tackle complex tasks. However, much of this literature appropriates the terminology of MAS without engaging with its foundational principles. In this position paper, we highlight critical discrepancies between MAS theory and current MAS LLMs implementations, focusing on four key areas: the social aspect of agency, environment design, coordination and communication protocols, and measuring emergent behaviours. Our position is that many MAS LLMs lack multi-agent characteristics such as autonomy, social interaction, and structured environments, and often rely on oversimplified, LLM-centric architectures. The field may slow down and lose traction by revisiting problems the MAS literature has already addressed. Therefore, we systematically analyse this issue and outline associated research opportunities; we advocate for better integrating established MAS concepts and more precise terminology to avoid mischaracterisation and missed opportunities.
In this paper, we present a novel diagnostic framework that integrates Knowledge Graphs (KGs) and Large Language Models (LLMs) to support system diagnostics in high-reliability systems such as nuclear power plants. Traditional diagnostic modeling struggles when systems become too complex, making functional modeling a more attractive approach. Our approach introduces a diagnostic framework grounded in the functional modeling principles of the Dynamic Master Logic (DML) model. It incorporates two coordinated LLM components, including an LLM-based workflow for automated construction of DML logic from system documentation and an LLM agent that facilitates interactive diagnostics. The generated logic is encoded into a structured KG, referred to as KG-DML, which supports hierarchical fault reasoning. Expert knowledge or operational data can also be incorporated to refine the model's precision and diagnostic depth. In the interaction phase, users submit natural language queries, which are interpreted by the LLM agent. The agent selects appropriate tools for structured reasoning, including upward and downward propagation across the KG-DML. Rather than embedding KG content into every prompt, the LLM agent distinguishes between diagnostic and interpretive tasks. For diagnostics, the agent selects and executes external tools that perform structured KG reasoning. For general queries, a Graph-based Retrieval-Augmented Generation (Graph-RAG) approach is used, retrieving relevant KG segments and embedding them into the prompt to generate natural explanations. A case study on an auxiliary feedwater system demonstrated the framework's effectiveness, with over 90% accuracy in key elements and consistent tool and argument extraction, supporting its use in safety-critical diagnostics.
Agentic AI, often powered by large language models (LLMs), is becoming increasingly popular and adopted to support autonomous reasoning, decision-making, and task execution across various domains. While agentic AI holds great promise, its deployment as services for easy access raises critical challenges in pricing, due to high infrastructure and computation costs, multi-dimensional and task-dependent Quality of Service (QoS), and growing concerns around liability in high-stakes applications. In this work, we propose PACT, a Pricing framework for cloud-based Agentic AI services through a Contract-Theoretic approach, which models QoS along both objective (e.g., response time) and subjective (e.g., user satisfaction) dimensions. PACT accounts for computational, infrastructure, and potential liability costs for the service provider, while ensuring incentive compatibility and individual rationality for the user under information asymmetry. Through contract-based selection, users receive tailored service offerings aligned with their needs. Numerical evaluations demonstrate that PACT improves QoS alignment between users and providers and offers a scalable, liable approach to pricing agentic AI services in the future.
Large language model (LLM)-driven multi-agent systems (MAS) are transforming how humans and AIs collaboratively generate ideas and artifacts. While existing surveys provide comprehensive overviews of MAS infrastructures, they largely overlook the dimension of \emph{creativity}, including how novel outputs are generated and evaluated, how creativity informs agent personas, and how creative workflows are coordinated. This is the first survey dedicated to creativity in MAS. We focus on text and image generation tasks, and present: (1) a taxonomy of agent proactivity and persona design; (2) an overview of generation techniques, including divergent exploration, iterative refinement, and collaborative synthesis, as well as relevant datasets and evaluation metrics; and (3) a discussion of key challenges, such as inconsistent evaluation standards, insufficient bias mitigation, coordination conflicts, and the lack of unified benchmarks. This survey offers a structured framework and roadmap for advancing the development, evaluation, and standardization of creative MAS.
This paper introduces ADEPT, a system using Large Language Model (LLM) personas to simulate multi-perspective ethical debates. ADEPT assembles panels of 'AI personas', each embodying a distinct ethical framework or stakeholder perspective (like a deontologist, consequentialist, or disability rights advocate), to deliberate on complex moral issues. Its application is demonstrated through a scenario about prioritizing patients for a limited number of ventilators inspired by real-world challenges in allocating scarce medical resources. Two debates, each with six LLM personas, were conducted; they only differed in the moral viewpoints represented: one included a Catholic bioethicist and a care theorist, the other substituted a rule-based Kantian philosopher and a legal adviser. Both panels ultimately favoured the same policy -- a lottery system weighted for clinical need and fairness, crucially avoiding the withdrawal of ventilators for reallocation. However, each panel reached that conclusion through different lines of argument, and their voting coalitions shifted once duty- and rights-based voices were present. Examination of the debate transcripts shows that the altered membership redirected attention toward moral injury, legal risk and public trust, which in turn changed four continuing personas' final positions. The work offers three contributions: (i) a transparent, replicable workflow for running and analysing multi-agent AI debates in bioethics; (ii) evidence that the moral perspectives included in such panels can materially change the outcome even when the factual inputs remain constant; and (iii) an analysis of the implications and future directions for such AI-mediated approaches to ethical deliberation and policy.
Project building is pivotal to support various program analysis tasks, such as generating intermediate rep- resentation code for static analysis and preparing binary code for vulnerability reproduction. However, automating the building process for C/C++ projects is a highly complex endeavor, involving tremendous technical challenges, such as intricate dependency management, diverse build systems, varied toolchains, and multifaceted error handling mechanisms. Consequently, building C/C++ projects often proves to be difficult in practice, hindering the progress of downstream applications. Unfortunately, research on facilitating the building of C/C++ projects remains to be inadequate. The emergence of Large Language Models (LLMs) offers promising solutions to automated software building. Trained on extensive corpora, LLMs can help unify diverse build systems through their comprehension capabilities and address complex errors by leveraging tacit knowledge storage. Moreover, LLM-based agents can be systematically designed to dynamically interact with the environment, effectively managing dynamic building issues. Motivated by these opportunities, we first conduct an empirical study to systematically analyze the current challenges in the C/C++ project building process. Particularly, we observe that most popular C/C++ projects encounter an average of five errors when relying solely on the default build systems. Based on our study, we develop an automated build system called CXXCrafter to specifically address the above-mentioned challenges, such as dependency resolution. Our evaluation on open-source software demonstrates that CXXCrafter achieves a success rate of 78% in project building. Specifically, among the Top100 dataset, 72 projects are built successfully by both CXXCrafter and manual efforts, 3 by CXXCrafter only, and 14 manually only. ...
Large language model (LLM) agents have shown impressive reasoning capabilities in interactive decision-making tasks. These agents interact with environment through intermediate interfaces, such as predefined action spaces and interaction rules, which mediate the perception and action. However, mismatches often happen between the internal expectations of the agent regarding the influence of its issued actions and the actual state transitions in the environment, a phenomenon referred to as \textbf{agent-environment misalignment}. While prior work has invested substantially in improving agent strategies and environment design, the critical role of the interface still remains underexplored. In this work, we empirically demonstrate that agent-environment misalignment poses a significant bottleneck to agent performance. To mitigate this issue, we propose \textbf{ALIGN}, an \underline{A}uto-A\underline{l}igned \underline{I}nterface \underline{G}e\underline{n}eration framework that alleviates the misalignment by enriching the interface. Specifically, the ALIGN-generated interface enhances both the static information of the environment and the step-wise observations returned to the agent. Implemented as a lightweight wrapper, this interface achieves the alignment without modifying either the agent logic or the environment code. Experiments across multiple domains including embodied tasks, web navigation and tool-use, show consistent performance improvements, with up to a 45.67\% success rate improvement observed in ALFWorld. Meanwhile, ALIGN-generated interface can generalize across different agent architectures and LLM backbones without interface regeneration. Code and experimental results are available at https://github.com/THUNLP-MT/ALIGN.
Vision-and-Language Navigation (VLN) requires the agent to navigate by following natural instructions under partial observability, making it difficult to align perception with language. Recent methods mitigate this by imagining future scenes, yet they rely on vision-based synthesis, leading to high computational cost and redundant details. To this end, we propose to adaptively imagine key environmental semantics via \textit{language} form, enabling a more reliable and efficient strategy. Specifically, we introduce a novel Adaptive Text Dreamer (ATD), a dual-branch self-guided imagination policy built upon a large language model (LLM). ATD is designed with a human-like left-right brain architecture, where the left brain focuses on logical integration, and the right brain is responsible for imaginative prediction of future scenes. To achieve this, we fine-tune only the Q-former within both brains to efficiently activate domain-specific knowledge in the LLM, enabling dynamic updates of logical reasoning and imagination during navigation. Furthermore, we introduce a cross-interaction mechanism to regularize the imagined outputs and inject them into a navigation expert module, allowing ATD to jointly exploit both the reasoning capacity of the LLM and the expertise of the navigation model. We conduct extensive experiments on the R2R benchmark, where ATD achieves state-of-the-art performance with fewer parameters. The code is \href{https://github.com/zhangpingrui/Adaptive-Text-Dreamer}{here}.
As large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in healthcare, ensuring their safety, particularly within collaborative multi-agent configurations, is paramount. In this paper we introduce MedSentry, a benchmark comprising 5 000 adversarial medical prompts spanning 25 threat categories with 100 subthemes. Coupled with this dataset, we develop an end-to-end attack-defense evaluation pipeline to systematically analyze how four representative multi-agent topologies (Layers, SharedPool, Centralized, and Decentralized) withstand attacks from 'dark-personality' agents. Our findings reveal critical differences in how these architectures handle information contamination and maintain robust decision-making, exposing their underlying vulnerability mechanisms. For instance, SharedPool's open information sharing makes it highly susceptible, whereas Decentralized architectures exhibit greater resilience thanks to inherent redundancy and isolation. To mitigate these risks, we propose a personality-scale detection and correction mechanism that identifies and rehabilitates malicious agents, restoring system safety to near-baseline levels. MedSentry thus furnishes both a rigorous evaluation framework and practical defense strategies that guide the design of safer LLM-based multi-agent systems in medical domains.
Large language models (LLMs) have large potential for molecular optimization, as they can gather external chemistry tools and enable collaborative interactions to iteratively refine molecular candidates. However, this potential remains underexplored, particularly in the context of structured reasoning, interpretability, and comprehensive tool-grounded molecular optimization. To address this gap, we introduce MT-Mol, a multi-agent framework for molecular optimization that leverages tool-guided reasoning and role-specialized LLM agents. Our system incorporates comprehensive RDKit tools, categorized into five distinct domains: structural descriptors, electronic and topological features, fragment-based functional groups, molecular representations, and miscellaneous chemical properties. Each category is managed by an expert analyst agent, responsible for extracting task-relevant tools and enabling interpretable, chemically grounded feedback. MT-Mol produces molecules with tool-aligned and stepwise reasoning through the interaction between the analyst agents, a molecule-generating scientist, a reasoning-output verifier, and a reviewer agent. As a result, we show that our framework shows the state-of-the-art performance of the PMO-1K benchmark on 17 out of 23 tasks.
Recent advances in multimodal question answering have primarily focused on combining heterogeneous modalities or fine-tuning multimodal large language models. While these approaches have shown strong performance, they often rely on a single, generalized reasoning strategy, overlooking the unique characteristics of each modality ultimately limiting both accuracy and interpretability. To address these limitations, we propose MAMMQA, a multi-agent QA framework for multimodal inputs spanning text, tables, and images. Our system includes two Visual Language Model (VLM) agents and one text-based Large Language Model (LLM) agent. The first VLM decomposes the user query into sub-questions and sequentially retrieves partial answers from each modality. The second VLM synthesizes and refines these results through cross-modal reasoning. Finally, the LLM integrates the insights into a cohesive answer. This modular design enhances interpretability by making the reasoning process transparent and allows each agent to operate within its domain of expertise. Experiments on diverse multimodal QA benchmarks demonstrate that our cooperative, multi-agent framework consistently outperforms existing baselines in both accuracy and robustness.
LLM-based agent systems are emerging as a new software paradigm and have been widely adopted across diverse domains such as medicine, robotics, and programming. However, maintaining these systems requires substantial effort, as they are inevitably prone to bugs and continually evolve to meet changing external requirements. Therefore, automatically resolving agent issues (i.e., bug reports or feature requests) is a crucial and challenging task. While recent software engineering (SE) agents (e.g., SWE-agent) have shown promise in addressing issues in traditional software systems, it remains unclear how effectively they can resolve real-world issues in agent systems, which differ significantly from traditional software. To fill this gap, we first manually analyze 201 real-world agent issues and identify common categories of agent issues. We then spend 500 person-hours constructing AGENTISSUE-BENCH, a reproducible benchmark comprising 50 agent issue resolution tasks (each with an executable environment and failure-triggering tests). We further evaluate state-of-the-art SE agents on AGENTISSUE-BENCH and reveal their limited effectiveness (i.e., with only 3.33% - 12.67% resolution rates). These results underscore the unique challenges of maintaining agent systems compared to traditional software, highlighting the need for further research to develop advanced SE agents for resolving agent issues. Data and code are available at https://alfin06.github.io/AgentIssue-Bench-Leaderboard/#/ .
Large language models (LLMs) have exhibited extraordinary performance in a variety of tasks while it remains challenging for them to solve complex multi-step tasks as agents. In practice, agents sensitive to the outcome of certain key steps which makes them likely to fail the task because of a subtle mistake in the planning trajectory. Recent approaches resort to calibrating the reasoning process through reinforcement learning. They reward or penalize every reasoning step with process supervision, as known as Process Reward Models (PRMs). However, PRMs are difficult and costly to scale up with a large number of next action candidates since they require extensive computations to acquire the training data through the per-step trajectory exploration. To mitigate this issue, we focus on the relative reward trend across successive reasoning steps and propose maintaining an increasing reward in the collected trajectories for process supervision, which we term Reward Rising Optimization (RRO). Specifically, we incrementally augment the process supervision until identifying a step exhibiting positive reward differentials, i.e. rising rewards, relative to its preceding iteration. This method dynamically expands the search space for the next action candidates, efficiently capturing high-quality data. We provide mathematical groundings and empirical results on the WebShop and InterCode-SQL benchmarks, showing that our proposed RRO achieves superior performance while requiring much less exploration cost.
This paper presents an intelligent work automation approach in the context of contemporary digital transformation by integrating generative AI and Intelligent Document Processing (IDP) technologies with an Automation Agent to realize End-to-End (E2E) automation of corporate financial expense processing tasks. While traditional Robotic Process Automation (RPA) has proven effective for repetitive, rule-based simple task automation, it faces limitations in handling unstructured data, exception management, and complex decision-making. This study designs and implements a four-stage integrated process comprising automatic recognition of supporting documents such as receipts via OCR/IDP, item classification based on a policy-driven database, intelligent exception handling supported by generative AI (large language models, LLMs), and human-in-the-loop final decision-making with continuous system learning through an Automation Agent. Applied to a major Korean enterprise (Company S), the system demonstrated quantitative benefits including over 80% reduction in processing time for paper receipt expense tasks, decreased error rates, and improved compliance, as well as qualitative benefits such as enhanced accuracy and consistency, increased employee satisfaction, and data-driven decision support. Furthermore, the system embodies a virtuous cycle by learning from human judgments to progressively improve automatic exception handling capabilities. Empirically, this research confirms that the organic integration of generative AI, IDP, and Automation Agents effectively overcomes the limitations of conventional automation and enables E2E automation of complex corporate processes. The study also discusses potential extensions to other domains such as accounting, human resources, and procurement, and proposes future directions for AI-driven hyper-automation development.
Reinforcement learning (RL) holds significant promise for training LLM agents to handle complex, goal-oriented tasks that require multi-step interactions with external environments. However, a critical challenge when applying RL to these agentic tasks arises from delayed rewards: feedback signals are typically available only after the entire task is completed. This makes it non-trivial to assign delayed rewards to earlier actions, providing insufficient guidance regarding environmental constraints and hindering agent training. In this work, we draw on the insight that the ultimate completion of a task emerges from the cumulative progress an agent makes across individual steps. We propose Stepwise Progress Attribution (SPA), a general reward redistribution framework that decomposes the final reward into stepwise contributions, each reflecting its incremental progress toward overall task completion. To achieve this, we train a progress estimator that accumulates stepwise contributions over a trajectory to match the task completion. During policy optimization, we combine the estimated per-step contribution with a grounding signal for actions executed in the environment as the fine-grained, intermediate reward for effective agent training. Extensive experiments on common agent benchmarks (including Webshop, ALFWorld, and VirtualHome) demonstrate that SPA consistently outperforms the state-of-the-art method in both success rate (+2.5\% on average) and grounding accuracy (+1.9\% on average). Further analyses demonstrate that our method remarkably provides more effective intermediate rewards for RL training. Our code is available at https://github.com/WangHanLinHenry/SPA-RL-Agent.
User-Centric Embodied Visual Tracking (UC-EVT) presents a novel challenge for reinforcement learning-based models due to the substantial gap between high-level user instructions and low-level agent actions. While recent advancements in language models (e.g., LLMs, VLMs, VLAs) have improved instruction comprehension, these models face critical limitations in either inference speed (LLMs, VLMs) or generalizability (VLAs) for UC-EVT tasks. To address these challenges, we propose \textbf{Hierarchical Instruction-aware Embodied Visual Tracking (HIEVT)} agent, which bridges instruction comprehension and action generation using \textit{spatial goals} as intermediaries. HIEVT first introduces \textit{LLM-based Semantic-Spatial Goal Aligner} to translate diverse human instructions into spatial goals that directly annotate the desired spatial position. Then the \textit{RL-based Adaptive Goal-Aligned Policy}, a general offline policy, enables the tracker to position the target as specified by the spatial goal. To benchmark UC-EVT tasks, we collect over ten million trajectories for training and evaluate across one seen environment and nine unseen challenging environments. Extensive experiments and real-world deployments demonstrate the robustness and generalizability of HIEVT across diverse environments, varying target dynamics, and complex instruction combinations. The complete project is available at https://sites.google.com/view/hievt.
The Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus (ARC) poses a stringent test of general AI capabilities, requiring solvers to infer abstract patterns from only a handful of examples. Despite substantial progress in deep learning, state-of-the-art models still achieve accuracy rates of merely 40-55% on 2024 ARC Competition, indicative of a significant gap between their performance and human-level reasoning. In this work, we seek to bridge that gap by introducing an analogy-inspired ARC dataset, GIFARC. Leveraging large language models (LLMs) and vision-language models (VLMs), we synthesize new ARC-style tasks from a variety of GIF images that include analogies. Each new task is paired with ground-truth analogy, providing an explicit mapping between visual transformations and everyday concepts. By embedding robust human-intuitive analogies into ARC-style tasks, GIFARC guides AI agents to evaluate the task analogically before engaging in brute-force pattern search, thus efficiently reducing problem complexity and build a more concise and human-understandable solution. We empirically validate that guiding LLM with analogic approach with GIFARC affects task-solving approaches of LLMs to align with analogic approach of human.
While reinforcement learning (RL) has achieved notable success in various domains, training effective policies for complex tasks remains challenging. Agents often converge to local optima and fail to maximize long-term rewards. Existing approaches to mitigate training bottlenecks typically fall into two categories: (i) Automated policy refinement, which identifies critical states from past trajectories to guide policy updates, but suffers from costly and uncertain model training; and (ii) Human-in-the-loop refinement, where human feedback is used to correct agent behavior, but this does not scale well to environments with large or continuous action spaces. In this work, we design a large language model-guided policy modulation framework that leverages LLMs to improve RL training without additional model training or human intervention. We first prompt an LLM to identify critical states from a sub-optimal agent's trajectories. Based on these states, the LLM then provides action suggestions and assigns implicit rewards to guide policy refinement. Experiments across standard RL benchmarks demonstrate that our method outperforms state-of-the-art baselines, highlighting the effectiveness of LLM-based explanations in addressing RL training bottlenecks.
Complex tasks involving tool integration pose significant challenges for Large Language Models (LLMs), leading to the emergence of multi-agent workflows as a promising solution. Reflection has emerged as an effective strategy for correcting erroneous trajectories in agentic workflows. However, existing approaches only exploit such capability in the post-action stage, where the agent observes the execution outcomes. We argue that, like humans, LLMs can also engage in reflection before action execution: the agent can anticipate undesirable outcomes from its own decisions, which not only provides a necessarily complementary perspective to evaluate the decision but also prevents the propagation of errors throughout the trajectory. In this paper, we propose MIRROR, a framework that consists of both intra-reflection, which critically assesses intended actions before execution, and inter-reflection, which further adjusts the trajectory based on observations. This design systematically leverages LLM reflection capabilities to eliminate and rectify erroneous actions on a more comprehensive scope. Evaluations on both the StableToolBench and TravelPlanner benchmarks demonstrate MIRROR's superior performance, achieving state-of-the-art results compared to existing approaches.
Personalized programming tutoring, such as exercise recommendation, can enhance learners' efficiency, motivation, and outcomes, which is increasingly important in modern digital education. However, the lack of sufficient and high-quality programming data, combined with the mismatch between offline evaluation and real-world learning, hinders the practical deployment of such systems. To address this challenge, many approaches attempt to simulate learner practice data, yet they often overlook the fine-grained, iterative nature of programming learning, resulting in a lack of interpretability and granularity. To fill this gap, we propose a LLM-based agent, CoderAgent, to simulate students' programming processes in a fine-grained manner without relying on real data. Specifically, we equip each human learner with an intelligent agent, the core of which lies in capturing the cognitive states of the human programming practice process. Inspired by ACT-R, a cognitive architecture framework, we design the structure of CoderAgent to align with human cognitive architecture by focusing on the mastery of programming knowledge and the application of coding ability. Recognizing the inherent patterns in multi-layered cognitive reasoning, we introduce the Programming Tree of Thought (PTOT), which breaks down the process into four steps: why, how, where, and what. This approach enables a detailed analysis of iterative problem-solving strategies. Finally, experimental evaluations on real-world datasets demonstrate that CoderAgent provides interpretable insights into learning trajectories and achieves accurate simulations, paving the way for personalized programming education.
Processing long contexts has become a critical capability for modern large language models (LLMs). Existing works leverage agent-based divide-and-conquer methods for processing long contexts. But these methods face crucial limitations, including prohibitive accumulated latency and amplified information loss from excessive agent invocations, and the disruption of inherent textual dependencies by immoderate partitioning. In this paper, we propose a novel multi-agent framework XpandA (Expand-Agent) coupled with question-driven workflow and dynamic partitioning for robust long-context processing. XpandA overcomes these limitations through: 1) dynamic partitioning of long texts, which adaptively modulates the filling rate of context windows for input sequences of vastly varying lengths; 2) question-guided protocol to update flat information ensembles within centralized shared memory, constructing consistent inter-agent knowledge across partitions; and 3) selectively replaying specific partitions based on the state-tracking of question-information couples to promote the resolution of inverted-order structures across partitions (e.g., flashbacks). We perform a comprehensive evaluation of XpandA on multiple long-context benchmarks with length varying from 1k to 1M, demonstrating XpandA's feasibility for processing ultra-long sequences and its significant effectiveness in enhancing the long-context capabilities of various LLMs by achieving 20\% improvements and 1.5x inference speedup over baselines of full-context, RAG and previous agent-based methods.
This paper presents Project Riley, a novel multimodal and multi-model conversational AI architecture oriented towards the simulation of reasoning influenced by emotional states. Drawing inspiration from Pixar's Inside Out, the system comprises five distinct emotional agents - Joy, Sadness, Fear, Anger, and Disgust - that engage in structured multi-round dialogues to generate, criticise, and iteratively refine responses. A final reasoning mechanism synthesises the contributions of these agents into a coherent output that either reflects the dominant emotion or integrates multiple perspectives. The architecture incorporates both textual and visual large language models (LLMs), alongside advanced reasoning and self-refinement processes. A functional prototype was deployed locally in an offline environment, optimised for emotional expressiveness and computational efficiency. From this initial prototype, another one emerged, called Armando, which was developed for use in emergency contexts, delivering emotionally calibrated and factually accurate information through the integration of Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) and cumulative context tracking. The Project Riley prototype was evaluated through user testing, in which participants interacted with the chatbot and completed a structured questionnaire assessing three dimensions: Emotional Appropriateness, Clarity and Utility, and Naturalness and Human-likeness. The results indicate strong performance in structured scenarios, particularly with respect to emotional alignment and communicative clarity.
LLM-based agents have shown promising capabilities in a growing range of software engineering (SWE) tasks. However, advancing this field faces two critical challenges. First, high-quality training data is scarce, especially data that reflects real-world SWE scenarios, where agents must interact with development environments, execute code and adapt behavior based on the outcomes of their actions. Existing datasets are either limited to one-shot code generation or comprise small, manually curated collections of interactive tasks, lacking both scale and diversity. Second, the lack of fresh interactive SWE tasks affects evaluation of rapidly improving models, as static benchmarks quickly become outdated due to contamination issues. To address these limitations, we introduce a novel, automated, and scalable pipeline to continuously extract real-world interactive SWE tasks from diverse GitHub repositories. Using this pipeline, we construct SWE-rebench, a public dataset comprising over 21,000 interactive Python-based SWE tasks, suitable for reinforcement learning of SWE agents at scale. Additionally, we use continuous supply of fresh tasks collected using SWE-rebench methodology to build a contamination-free benchmark for agentic software engineering. We compare results of various LLMs on this benchmark to results on SWE-bench Verified and show that performance of some language models might be inflated due to contamination issues.
Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) have enabled agents to autonomously perform complex, open-ended tasks. However, many existing frameworks depend heavily on manually predefined tools and workflows, which hinder their adaptability, scalability, and generalization across domains. In this work, we introduce Alita--a generalist agent designed with the principle of "Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication," enabling scalable agentic reasoning through minimal predefinition and maximal self-evolution. For minimal predefinition, Alita is equipped with only one component for direct problem-solving, making it much simpler and neater than previous approaches that relied heavily on hand-crafted, elaborate tools and workflows. This clean design enhances its potential to generalize to challenging questions, without being limited by tools. For Maximal self-evolution, we enable the creativity of Alita by providing a suite of general-purpose components to autonomously construct, refine, and reuse external capabilities by generating task-related model context protocols (MCPs) from open source, which contributes to scalable agentic reasoning. Notably, Alita achieves 75.15% pass@1 and 87.27% pass@3 accuracy, which is top-ranking among general-purpose agents, on the GAIA benchmark validation dataset, 74.00% and 52.00% pass@1, respectively, on Mathvista and PathVQA, outperforming many agent systems with far greater complexity. More details will be updated at $\href{https://github.com/CharlesQ9/Alita}{https://github.com/CharlesQ9/Alita}$.