Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated strong reasoning and tool-use capabilities, yet they often fail in real-world tool-interactions due to incorrect parameterization, poor tool selection, or misinterpretation of user intent. These issues often stem from an incomplete understanding of user goals and inadequate comprehension of tool documentation. While Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting has proven effective for enhancing reasoning in general contexts, our analysis reveals that free-form CoT is insufficient and sometimes counterproductive for structured function-calling tasks. To address this, we introduce a curriculum-inspired framework that leverages structured reasoning templates to guide LLMs through more deliberate step-by-step instructions for generating function callings. Experimental results show that our method reduces tool-use errors, achieving 3-12% relative improvements over strong baselines across diverse model series and approaches. Moreover, our framework enhances the robustness, interpretability, and transparency of tool-using agents, advancing the development of more reliable AI assistants for real-world applications.
Large Language Models (LLMs) show strong reasoning abilities but rely on internalized knowledge that is often insufficient, outdated, or incorrect when trying to answer a question that requires specific domain knowledge. Knowledge Graphs (KGs) provide structured external knowledge, yet their complexity and multi-hop reasoning requirements make integration challenging. We present ARK-V1, a simple KG-agent that iteratively explores graphs to answer natural language queries. We evaluate several not fine-tuned state-of-the art LLMs as backbones for ARK-V1 on the CoLoTa dataset, which requires both KG-based and commonsense reasoning over long-tail entities. ARK-V1 achieves substantially higher conditional accuracies than Chain-of-Thought baselines, and larger backbone models show a clear trend toward better coverage, correctness, and stability.
We explore whether techniques from AI can help discover new combinatorial structures that improve provable limits on efficient algorithms. Specifically, we use AlphaEvolve (an LLM coding agent) to study two settings: a) Average-case hardness for MAX-CUT and MAX-Independent Set: We improve a recent result of Kunisky and Yu to obtain near-optimal upper and (conditional) lower bounds on certification algorithms for MAX-CUT and MAX-Independent Set on random 3- and 4-regular graphs. Our improved lower bounds are obtained by constructing nearly extremal Ramanujan graphs on as many as $163$ nodes, using AlphaEvolve. Additionally, via analytical arguments we strengthen the upper bounds to settle the computational hardness of these questions up to an error in the third decimal place. b) Worst-case Hardness of Approximation for MAX-k-CUT: We obtain new inapproximability results, proving that it is NP-hard to approximate MAX-4-CUT and MAX-3-CUT within factors of $0.987$ and $0.9649$ respectively, using AlphaEvolve to discover new gadget reductions. Our MAX-4-CUT result improves upon the SOTA of $0.9883$, and our MAX-3-CUT result improves on the current best gadget-based inapproximability result of $0.9853$, but falls short of improving the SOTA of $16/17$ that relies on a custom PCP, rather than a gadget reduction from "standard" H{\aa}stad-style PCPs. A key technical challenge we faced: verifying a candidate construction produced by AlphaEvolve is costly (often requiring exponential time). In both settings above, our results were enabled by using AlphaEvolve itself to evolve the verification procedure to be faster (sometimes by $10,000\times$). We conclude with a discussion of norms by which to assess the assistance from AI in developing proofs.
Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used for social simulation, where populations of agents are expected to reproduce human-like collective behavior. However, we find that many recent studies adopt experimental designs that systematically undermine the validity of their claims. From a survey of over 40 papers, we identify six recurring methodological flaws: agents are often homogeneous (Profile), interactions are absent or artificially imposed (Interaction), memory is discarded (Memory), prompts tightly control outcomes (Minimal-Control), agents can infer the experimental hypothesis (Unawareness), and validation relies on simplified theoretical models rather than real-world data (Realism). For instance, GPT-4o and Qwen-3 correctly infer the underlying social experiment in 53.1% of cases when given instructions from prior work-violating the Unawareness principle. We formalize these six requirements as the PIMMUR principles and argue they are necessary conditions for credible LLM-based social simulation. To demonstrate their impact, we re-run five representative studies using a framework that enforces PIMMUR and find that the reported social phenomena frequently fail to emerge under more rigorous conditions. Our work establishes methodological standards for LLM-based multi-agent research and provides a foundation for more reliable and reproducible claims about "AI societies."
Intelligent systems have traditionally been designed as tools rather than collaborators, often lacking critical characteristics that collaboration partnerships require. Recent advances in large language model (LLM) agents open new opportunities for human-LLM-agent collaboration by enabling natural communication and various social and cognitive behaviors. Yet it remains unclear whether principles of computer-mediated collaboration established in HCI and CSCW persist, change, or fail when humans collaborate with LLM agents. To support systematic investigations of these questions, we introduce an open and configurable research platform for HCI researchers. The platform's modular design allows seamless adaptation of classic CSCW experiments and manipulation of theory-grounded interaction controls. We demonstrate the platform's effectiveness and usability through two case studies: (1) re-implementing the classic human-human-collaboration task Shape Factory as a between-subject human-agent-collaboration experiment with 16 participants, and (2) a participatory cognitive walkthrough with five HCI researchers to refine workflows and interfaces for experiment setup and analysis.
Recent advances in GUI agents have achieved remarkable grounding and action-prediction performance, yet existing models struggle with unreliable reward signals and limited online trajectory generation. In this paper, we introduce Orcust, a framework that integrates Principle-Constrained Reward Modeling (PCRM) and Online VM-Grounded Trajectory Construction (OVTC) to enhance reasoning reliability and data efficiency in interactive GUI tasks. We leverages environment-verifiable and LLM-derived principle to enforce interpretable reward signals that constrain long chain-of-thought reasoning and rule-based feedback. OVTC spins up instrumented virtual machines to autonomously collect structured GUI interaction trajectories with explicit procedural and structural objectives, enabling the training of a stepwise reward model that robustly captures human preferences and adheres to task-specific constraints. Extensive experiments on standard GUI benchmarks covering perceptual grounding, foundational operations, and end-to-end task execution reveal that Orcust achieves state-of-the-art performance, improving by 22.2\% on ScreenSpot and 23.9\% on ScreenSpot-Pro over the base model (i.e. Qwen2.5-VL-7B). The results demonstrate Orcust's effectiveness in enhancing the reasoning, adaptability and scalability of GUI agents across various environments and task complexities.
Security practitioners face growing challenges in exploit assessment, as public vulnerability repositories are increasingly populated with inconsistent and low-quality exploit artifacts. Existing scoring systems, such as CVSS and EPSS, offer limited support for this task. They either rely on theoretical metrics or produce opaque probability estimates without assessing whether usable exploit code exists. In practice, security teams often resort to manual triage of exploit repositories, which is time-consuming, error-prone, and difficult to scale. We present AEAS, an automated system designed to assess and prioritize actionable exploits through static analysis. AEAS analyzes both exploit code and associated documentation to extract a structured set of features reflecting exploit availability, functionality, and setup complexity. It then computes an actionability score for each exploit and produces ranked exploit recommendations. We evaluate AEAS on a dataset of over 5,000 vulnerabilities derived from 600+ real-world applications frequently encountered by red teams. Manual validation and expert review on representative subsets show that AEAS achieves a 100% top-3 success rate in recommending functional exploits and shows strong alignment with expert-validated rankings. These results demonstrate the effectiveness of AEAS in supporting exploit-driven vulnerability prioritization.
Large Language Models (LLMs) struggle with information forgetting and inefficiency in long-horizon, multi-turn dialogues. To address this, we propose a training-free prompt engineering method, the State-Update Multi-turn Dialogue Strategy. It utilizes "State Reconstruction" and "History Remind" mechanisms to effectively manage dialogue history. Our strategy shows strong performance across multiple multi-hop QA datasets. For instance, on the HotpotQA dataset, it improves the core information filtering score by 32.6%, leading to a 14.1% increase in the downstream QA score, while also reducing inference time by 73.1% and token consumption by 59.4%. Ablation studies confirm the pivotal roles of both components. Our work offers an effective solution for optimizing LLMs in long-range interactions, providing new insights for developing more robust Agents.
The evolution of morality presents a puzzle: natural selection should favor self-interest, yet humans developed moral systems promoting altruism. We address this question by introducing a novel Large Language Model (LLM)-based agent simulation framework modeling prehistoric hunter-gatherer societies. This platform is designed to probe diverse questions in social evolution, from survival advantages to inter-group dynamics. To investigate moral evolution, we designed agents with varying moral dispositions based on the Expanding Circle Theory \citep{singer1981expanding}. We evaluated their evolutionary success across a series of simulations and analyzed their decision-making in specially designed moral dilemmas. These experiments reveal how an agent's moral framework, in combination with its cognitive constraints, directly shapes its behavior and determines its evolutionary outcome. Crucially, the emergent patterns echo seminal theories from related domains of social science, providing external validation for the simulations. This work establishes LLM-based simulation as a powerful new paradigm to complement traditional research in evolutionary biology and anthropology, opening new avenues for investigating the complexities of moral and social evolution.
Large Language Models (LLMs) have excelled in question-answering (QA) tasks within single domains. However, their reasoning and coordination capabilities in complex, multi-stage scenarios remain underexplored. Existing benchmarks typically focus on isolated tasks or narrow domains, overlooking models' abilities for multi-stage collaboration and optimization without explicit external guidance. To bridge this gap, we propose \textbf{MSCoRe}, a novel benchmark comprising 126696 domain-specific QA instances spanning scenarios in automotive, pharmaceutical, electronics, and energy sectors. The dataset is created using a structured three-phase pipeline: dynamic sampling, iterative question-answer generation, and a multi-level quality assessment to ensure data quality. Tasks are further categorized into three difficulty levels according to stage coverage and complexity. With MSCoRe, we have conducted a comprehensive evaluation of various state-of-the-art LLM agents. The commercial models performed best across all tasks and scenarios, but a notable gap in ROUGE scores remains between simple and complex tasks. We also tested the models' robustness and found that their performance is negatively affected by noisy data. MSCoRe provides a valuable new resource for the community to evaluate and improve multi-stage reasoning in LLM agents. The code and data are available at https://github.com/D3E0-source/MSCoRE.
Task-oriented conversational systems are essential for efficiently addressing diverse user needs, yet their development requires substantial amounts of high-quality conversational data that is challenging and costly to obtain. While large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated potential in generating synthetic conversations, the extent to which these agent-generated interactions can effectively substitute real human conversations remains unclear. This work presents the first systematic comparison between LLM-simulated users and human users in personalized task-oriented conversations. We propose a comprehensive analytical framework encompassing three key aspects (conversation strategy, interaction style, and conversation evaluation) and ten distinct dimensions for evaluating user behaviors, and collect parallel conversational datasets from both human users and LLM agent users across four representative scenarios under identical conditions. Our analysis reveals significant behavioral differences between the two user types in problem-solving approaches, question broadness, user engagement, context dependency, feedback polarity and promise, language style, and hallucination awareness. We found consistency in the agent users and human users across the depth-first or breadth-first dimensions, as well as the usefulness dimensions. These findings provide critical insights for advancing LLM-based user simulation. Our multi-dimensional taxonomy constructed a generalizable framework for analyzing user behavior patterns, offering insights from LLM agent users and human users. By this work, we provide perspectives on rethinking how to use user simulation in conversational systems in the future.
Large language models (LLMs) have advanced code generation from single-function tasks to competitive-programming problems, but existing multi-agent solutions either rely on costly large-scale ($>$ 30B) models or collapse when downsized to small open-source models. We present MapCoder-Lite, which upgrades a single 7B model into four role-specialised agents-retriever, planner, coder, and debugger-using only rank-32, role-specific LoRA adapters ($<3\%$ extra parameters). Three lightweight techniques make this possible: (i) trajectory distillation from strong LLMs fixes format fragility in retrieval and debugging, (ii) supervisor-guided correction strengthens planning and coding agents, and (iii) agent-wise LoRA fine-tuning delivers memory-efficient specialisation. Comprehensive evaluation on xCodeEval, APPS, and CodeContests shows that MapCoder-Lite more than doubles xCodeEval accuracy (from $13.2\%$ to $28.3\%$), eliminates all format failures, and closes to within six points of a 32B baseline while cutting GPU memory and token-generation time by $4\times$. These results demonstrate that careful agent-wise fine-tuning unleashes high-quality multi-agent coding on a small language model.
The increasing autonomy of LLM agents in handling sensitive communications, accelerated by Model Context Protocol (MCP) and Agent-to-Agent (A2A) frameworks, creates urgent privacy challenges. While recent work reveals significant gaps between LLMs' privacy Q&A performance and their agent behavior, existing benchmarks remain limited to static, simplified scenarios. We present PrivacyChecker, a model-agnostic, contextual integrity based mitigation approach that effectively reduces privacy leakage from 36.08% to 7.30% on DeepSeek-R1 and from 33.06% to 8.32% on GPT-4o, all while preserving task helpfulness. We also introduce PrivacyLens-Live, transforming static benchmarks into dynamic MCP and A2A environments that reveal substantially higher privacy risks in practical. Our modular mitigation approach integrates seamlessly into agent protocols through three deployment strategies, providing practical privacy protection for the emerging agentic ecosystem. Our data and code will be made available at https://aka.ms/privacy_in_action.
Dialogue agents based on large language models (LLMs) have shown promising performance in proactive dialogue, which requires effective strategy planning. However, existing approaches to strategy planning for proactive dialogue face several limitations: limited strategy coverage, preference bias in planning, and reliance on costly additional training. To address these, we propose PRINCIPLES: a synthetic strategy memory for proactive dialogue agents. PRINCIPLES is derived through offline self-play simulations and serves as reusable knowledge that guides strategy planning during inference, eliminating the need for additional training and data annotation. We evaluate PRINCIPLES in both emotional support and persuasion domains, demonstrating consistent improvements over strong baselines. Furthermore, PRINCIPLES maintains its robustness across extended and more diverse evaluation settings. See our project page at https://huggingface.co/spaces/kimnamssya/Principles.
We introduce FinDebate, a multi-agent framework for financial analysis, integrating collaborative debate with domain-specific Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG). Five specialized agents, covering earnings, market, sentiment, valuation, and risk, run in parallel to synthesize evidence into multi-dimensional insights. To mitigate overconfidence and improve reliability, we introduce a safe debate protocol that enables agents to challenge and refine initial conclusions while preserving coherent recommendations. Experimental results, based on both LLM-based and human evaluations, demonstrate the framework's efficacy in producing high-quality analysis with calibrated confidence levels and actionable investment strategies across multiple time horizons.
Large Language Model (LLM) agents tackle data-intensive tasks such as deep research and code generation. However, their effectiveness depends on frequent interactions with knowledge sources across remote clouds or regions. Such interactions can create non-trivial latency and cost bottlenecks. Existing caching solutions focus on exact-match queries, limiting their effectiveness for semantic knowledge reuse. To address this challenge, we introduce Asteria, a novel cross-region knowledge caching architecture for LLM agents. At its core are two abstractions: Semantic Element (SE) and Semantic Retrieval Index (Sine). A semantic element captures the semantic embedding representation of an LLM query together with performance-aware metadata such as latency, cost, and staticity. Sine then provides two-stage retrieval: a vector similar index with semantic embedding for fast candidate selection and a lightweight LLM-powered semantic judger for precise validation. Atop these primitives, Asteria builds a new cache interface that includes a new semantic-aware cache hit definition, a cost-efficient eviction policy, and proactive prefetching. To reduce overhead, Asteria co-locates the small LLM judger with the main LLM using adaptive scheduling and resource sharing. Our evaluation demonstrates that Asteria delivers substantial performance improvements without compromising correctness. On representative search workloads, Asteria achieves up to a 3.6$\times$ increase in throughput by maintaining cache hit rates of over 85%, while preserving accuracy virtually identical to non-cached baselines. Asteria also improves throughput for complex coding tasks by 20%, showcasing its versatility across diverse agentic workloads.
Automating radiology report generation poses a dual challenge: building clinically reliable systems and designing rigorous evaluation protocols. We introduce a multi-agent reinforcement learning framework that serves as both a benchmark and evaluation environment for multimodal clinical reasoning in the radiology ecosystem. The proposed framework integrates large language models (LLMs) and large vision models (LVMs) within a modular architecture composed of ten specialized agents responsible for image analysis, feature extraction, report generation, review, and evaluation. This design enables fine-grained assessment at both the agent level (e.g., detection and segmentation accuracy) and the consensus level (e.g., report quality and clinical relevance). We demonstrate an implementation using chatGPT-4o on public radiology datasets, where LLMs act as evaluators alongside medical radiologist feedback. By aligning evaluation protocols with the LLM development lifecycle, including pretraining, finetuning, alignment, and deployment, the proposed benchmark establishes a path toward trustworthy deviance-based radiology report generation.
Tool-augmented large language models (LLMs), hereafter LLM agents, leverage external tools to solve diverse tasks and interface with the real world. However, current training practices largely rely on supervised fine-tuning (SFT) over static trajectories or reinforcement learning (RL) on narrow tasks, and generalize poorly beyond development settings, leading to brittleness with new tools and unseen workflows. Because code execution reflects many structures of real-world workflows, coding problems provide a natural basis for building agent training environments. Motivated by this, we introduce CodeGym, a scalable framework that synthesizes diverse, verifiable, and controllable multi-turn tool-use environments for agent RL, enabling LLM agents to explore and master various workflows actively. CodeGym rewrites static coding problems into interactive environments by extracting atomic functions or logic into callable tools, yielding verifiable tasks that span various tool-execution workflows. Models of varying sizes and chain-of-thought configurations, trained in CodeGym, exhibit consistent out-of-distribution generalizability; for example, Qwen2.5-32B-Instruct achieves an absolute accuracy gain of 8.7 points on the OOD benchmark $\tau$-Bench. These results highlight CodeGym as a step toward scalable general-purpose RL environments that align with real-world agent workflows.
Systematic Literature Reviews (SLRs) are foundational to evidence-based research but remain labor-intensive and prone to inconsistency across disciplines. We present an LLM-based SLR evaluation copilot built on a Multi-Agent System (MAS) architecture to assist researchers in assessing the overall quality of the systematic literature reviews. The system automates protocol validation, methodological assessment, and topic relevance checks using a scholarly database. Unlike conventional single-agent methods, our design integrates a specialized agentic approach aligned with PRISMA guidelines to support more structured and interpretable evaluations. We conducted an initial study on five published SLRs from diverse domains, comparing system outputs to expert-annotated PRISMA scores, and observed 84% agreement. While early results are promising, this work represents a first step toward scalable and accurate NLP-driven systems for interdisciplinary workflows and reveals their capacity for rigorous, domain-agnostic knowledge aggregation to streamline the review process.
Modern signal processing (SP) pipelines, whether model-based or data-driven, often constrained by complex and fragmented workflow, rely heavily on expert knowledge and manual engineering, and struggle with adaptability and generalization under limited data. In contrast, Large Language Models (LLMs) offer strong reasoning capabilities, broad general-purpose knowledge, in-context learning, and cross-modal transfer abilities, positioning them as powerful tools for automating and generalizing SP workflows. Motivated by these potentials, we introduce SignalLLM, the first general-purpose LLM-based agent framework for general SP tasks. Unlike prior LLM-based SP approaches that are limited to narrow applications or tricky prompting, SignalLLM introduces a principled, modular architecture. It decomposes high-level SP goals into structured subtasks via in-context learning and domain-specific retrieval, followed by hierarchical planning through adaptive retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) and refinement; these subtasks are then executed through prompt-based reasoning, cross-modal reasoning, code synthesis, model invocation, or data-driven LLM-assisted modeling. Its generalizable design enables the flexible selection of problem solving strategies across different signal modalities, task types, and data conditions. We demonstrate the versatility and effectiveness of SignalLLM through five representative tasks in communication and sensing, such as radar target detection, human activity recognition, and text compression. Experimental results show superior performance over traditional and existing LLM-based methods, particularly in few-shot and zero-shot settings.
Thematic Analysis (TA) is a widely used qualitative method that provides a structured yet flexible framework for identifying and reporting patterns in clinical interview transcripts. However, manual thematic analysis is time-consuming and limits scalability. Recent advances in LLMs offer a pathway to automate thematic analysis, but alignment with human results remains limited. To address these limitations, we propose SFT-TA, an automated thematic analysis framework that embeds supervised fine-tuned (SFT) agents within a multi-agent system. Our framework outperforms existing frameworks and the gpt-4o baseline in alignment with human reference themes. We observed that SFT agents alone may underperform, but achieve better results than the baseline when embedded within a multi-agent system. Our results highlight that embedding SFT agents in specific roles within a multi-agent system is a promising pathway to improve alignment with desired outputs for thematic analysis.
This paper introduces MCTS-EP, an online learning framework that combines large language models (LLM) with Monte Carlo Tree Search (MCTS) for training embodied agents. MCTS-EP integrates three key components: MCTS-guided exploration for preference data collection, efficient multi-modal reasoning mechanism, and iterative training pipeline based on preference optimization. We theoretically prove that MCTS-EP achieves better performance bounds than conventional on-policy algorithms when the loss function is strongly convex, and demonstrate that it can be formulated as a search-enhanced variant of GAIL. MCTS-EP achieves state-of-the-art performace across serval benchmarks. In ALFWorld, it achieves 92% and 87% success rates for textual and visual tasks. In WebShop, it reaches an average reward of 0.81. MTCS-EP also reduces average interaction steps from from 18.7/19.5 to 10.2/9.9 steps in visual ALFWorld.Code available at: https://github.com/xuhang-2/Embodied-Agent-Planning
Next point-of-interest (POI) recommendation predicts a user's next destination from historical movements. Traditional models require intensive training, while LLMs offer flexible and generalizable zero-shot solutions but often generate generic or geographically irrelevant results due to missing trajectory and spatial context. To address these issues, we propose RALLM-POI, a framework that couples LLMs with retrieval-augmented generation and self-rectification. We first propose a Historical Trajectory Retriever (HTR) that retrieves relevant past trajectories to serve as contextual references, which are then reranked by a Geographical Distance Reranker (GDR) for prioritizing spatially relevant trajectories. Lastly, an Agentic LLM Rectifier (ALR) is designed to refine outputs through self-reflection. Without additional training, RALLM-POI achieves substantial accuracy gains across three real-world Foursquare datasets, outperforming both conventional and LLM-based baselines. Code is released at https://github.com/LKRcrocodile/RALLM-POI.
Accurate crop disease diagnosis is essential for sustainable agriculture and global food security. Existing methods, which primarily rely on unimodal models such as image-based classifiers and object detectors, are limited in their ability to incorporate domain-specific agricultural knowledge and lack support for interactive, language-based understanding. Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) and large vision-language models (LVLMs) have opened new avenues for multimodal reasoning. However, their performance in agricultural contexts remains limited due to the absence of specialized datasets and insufficient domain adaptation. In this work, we propose AgriDoctor, a modular and extensible multimodal framework designed for intelligent crop disease diagnosis and agricultural knowledge interaction. As a pioneering effort to introduce agent-based multimodal reasoning into the agricultural domain, AgriDoctor offers a novel paradigm for building interactive and domain-adaptive crop health solutions. It integrates five core components: a router, classifier, detector, knowledge retriever and LLMs. To facilitate effective training and evaluation, we construct AgriMM, a comprehensive benchmark comprising 400000 annotated disease images, 831 expert-curated knowledge entries, and 300000 bilingual prompts for intent-driven tool selection. Extensive experiments demonstrate that AgriDoctor, trained on AgriMM, significantly outperforms state-of-the-art LVLMs on fine-grained agricultural tasks, establishing a new paradigm for intelligent and sustainable farming applications.
The growing volume of academic papers has made it increasingly difficult for researchers to efficiently extract key information. While large language models (LLMs) based agents are capable of automating question answering (QA) workflows for scientific papers, there still lacks a comprehensive and realistic benchmark to evaluate their capabilities. Moreover, training an interactive agent for this specific task is hindered by the shortage of high-quality interaction trajectories. In this work, we propose AirQA, a human-annotated comprehensive paper QA dataset in the field of artificial intelligence (AI), with 13,948 papers and 1,246 questions, that encompasses multi-task, multi-modal and instance-level evaluation. Furthermore, we propose ExTrActor, an automated framework for instruction data synthesis. With three LLM-based agents, ExTrActor can perform example generation and trajectory collection without human intervention. Evaluations of multiple open-source and proprietary models show that most models underperform on AirQA, demonstrating the quality of our dataset. Extensive experiments confirm that ExTrActor consistently improves the multi-turn tool-use capability of small models, enabling them to achieve performance comparable to larger ones.
Large Language Models (LLMs) demonstrate human-like capabilities in language understanding, reasoning, and generation, driving interest in using LLM-based agents to simulate human feedback in recommender systems. However, most existing approaches rely on static user profiling, neglecting the temporal and dynamic nature of user interests. This limitation stems from a disconnect between language modelling and behaviour modelling, which constrains the capacity of agents to represent sequential patterns. To address this challenge, we propose a Dynamic Temporal-aware Agent-based simulator for Recommender Systems, DyTA4Rec, which enables agents to model and utilise evolving user behaviour based on historical interactions. DyTA4Rec features a dynamic updater for real-time profile refinement, temporal-enhanced prompting for sequential context, and self-adaptive aggregation for coherent feedback. Experimental results at group and individual levels show that DyTA4Rec significantly improves the alignment between simulated and actual user behaviour by modelling dynamic characteristics and enhancing temporal awareness in LLM-based agents.
While Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive reasoning and planning abilities in textual domains and can effectively follow instructions for complex tasks, their capacity for spatial understanding and reasoning remains limited. Such capabilities, however, are critical for applications like content-aware graphic layout design, which demands precise placement, alignment, and structural organization of multiple elements within constrained visual spaces. To address this gap, we propose LaySPA, a reinforcement learning-based framework that augments LLM agents with explicit spatial reasoning capabilities. LaySPA leverages hybrid reward signals that capture geometric validity, structural fidelity, and visual quality, enabling agents to model inter-element relationships, navigate the canvas, and optimize spatial arrangements. Through iterative self-exploration and adaptive policy optimization, LaySPA produces both interpretable reasoning traces and structured layouts. Experimental results demonstrate that LaySPA generates structurally sound and visually appealing layouts, outperforming larger general-purpose LLMs and achieving results on par with state-of-the-art specialized layout models.
We introduce seqBench, a parametrized benchmark for probing sequential reasoning limits in Large Language Models (LLMs) through precise, multi-dimensional control over several key complexity dimensions. seqBench allows systematic variation of (1) the logical depth, defined as the number of sequential actions required to solve the task; (2) the number of backtracking steps along the optimal path, quantifying how often the agent must revisit prior states to satisfy deferred preconditions (e.g., retrieving a key after encountering a locked door); and (3) the noise ratio, defined as the ratio between supporting and distracting facts about the environment. Our evaluations on state-of-the-art LLMs reveal a universal failure pattern: accuracy collapses exponentially beyond a model-specific logical depth. Unlike existing benchmarks, seqBench's fine-grained control facilitates targeted analyses of these reasoning failures, illuminating universal scaling laws and statistical limits, as detailed in this paper alongside its generation methodology and evaluation metrics. We find that even top-performing models systematically fail on seqBench's structured reasoning tasks despite minimal search complexity, underscoring key limitations in their commonsense reasoning capabilities. Designed for future evolution to keep pace with advancing models, the seqBench datasets are publicly released to spur deeper scientific inquiry into LLM reasoning, aiming to establish a clearer understanding of their true potential and current boundaries for robust real-world application.
Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable capabilities not only in language generation but also in advancing scientific discovery. A growing body of work has explored ways to improve their reasoning, from self-consistency and chain-of-thought to multi-agent debate. Inspired by the dynamics of scientific committees and the "Society of Mind," we introduce Roundtable Policy, a complementary inference-time reasoning framework that performs inference through the weighted consensus of multiple LLMs. Our findings indicate that this approach significantly enhances reasoning in complex heterogeneous scientific tasks and improves scientific narratives in terms of creativity, rigor, and logical coherence, while reducing hallucinations that single models are prone to. Our approach emphasizes structured and interpretable consensus rather than opaque convergence, while requiring only black-box access and uniform procedures, making it broadly applicable to multi-LLM reasoning.
Child helpline training often relies on human-led roleplay, which is both time- and resource-consuming. To address this, rule-based interactive agent simulations have been proposed to provide a structured training experience for new counsellors. However, these agents might suffer from limited language understanding and response variety. To overcome these limitations, we present a hybrid interactive agent that integrates Large Language Models (LLMs) into a rule-based Belief-Desire-Intention (BDI) framework, simulating more realistic virtual child chat conversations. This hybrid solution incorporates LLMs into three components: intent recognition, response generation, and a bypass mechanism. We evaluated the system through two studies: a script-based assessment comparing LLM-generated responses to human-crafted responses, and a within-subject experiment (N=37) comparing the LLM-integrated agent with a rule-based version. The first study provided evidence that the three LLM components were non-inferior to human-crafted responses. In the second study, we found credible support for two hypotheses: participants perceived the LLM-integrated agent as more believable and reported more positive attitudes toward it than the rule-based agent. Additionally, although weaker, there was some support for increased engagement (posterior probability = 0.845, 95% HDI [-0.149, 0.465]). Our findings demonstrate the potential of integrating LLMs into rule-based systems, offering a promising direction for more flexible but controlled training systems.