Agentic Reasoning

Deontic reasoning is the task of answering questions by applying explicit rules and policies to case-specific facts, for example computing tax liability under a statute or determining the outcome of an immigration appeal. A key technical challenge for LLM-based deontic reasoning is that the relevant ruleset can be long and cross-referenced, so models may still fail to locate the rules needed for a particular reasoning step. We introduce Deontic Agentic Reasoning (DAR), an agentic reasoning setup in which the model interacts with the statutes on demand. We evaluate DAR under multiple harnesses on hard subsets of DeonticBench. Across these settings, we find that agentic harnesses can push the frontier on deontic reasoning tasks, but improvements are not uniform: weaker models often degrade on numerical tasks while consuming far more tokens.

Mobile agents are increasingly expected to operate everyday applications from screenshots and language goals, where reliable control requires reasoning over screen affordances, multi-step navigation, and future state changes. However, many agents externalize this computation as long textual chains of thought, which slows interaction, increases supervision cost, and complicates deployment. We introduce MIRAGE, a framework that learns continuous latent reasoning representations from visible textual reasoning traces. MIRAGE transfers explicit reasoning into compact hidden states, enabling the agent to reason internally without decoding long rationales. It also incorporates a generative world-model objective: latent reasoning vectors are aligned with future screenshots, encouraging the agent to anticipate upcoming interface states before acting. This turns hidden computation into both a compressed thought representation and a forward-looking model of environment dynamics. At inference time, MIRAGE reasons in continuous latent space, reducing token generation while improving execution efficiency. On AndroidWorld, MIRAGE matches explicit chain-of-thought supervised fine-tuning in the 4B ablation with a 3-5x lower decoded-token budget and improves a comparable instruction-tuned baseline by 10.2 points; on AndroidControl, it improves action grounding while generating over 75% fewer tokens.

Symbolic regression (SR) discovers compact mathematical expressions from data, yet recent LLM-based evolutionary methods remain sample-inefficient because they rely mainly on scalar feedback such as MSE. We identify a core limitation: existing methods conflate candidate proposal with search guidance, requiring the LLM to infer how to evolve an expression, diagnose its errors, and reuse past experience from a single score. To address this, we propose Deliberate Evolution (DE), an agentic framework that decouples symbolic generation from search control. DE guides LLM proposals with adaptive operators for search direction, analytical tools for structural diagnosis, and reflective memory for trajectory-level experience. Experiments on LLM-SRBench show that DE consistently outperforms representative LLM-based SR baselines across diverse scientific domains while using only 40% of the standard sample budget.

AI agents can increasingly handle the mechanical tasks of financial analysis: retrieving documents, calculating formulas, updating spreadsheets. The harder, more valuable challenge is reasoning through the open-ended questions that define expert Analyst work. Existing benchmarks do not capture this class of problem, and those that attempt to evaluate open-ended reasoning rely on model-judged outputs that introduce noise and circularity. We present Hedge-Bench 1.0: a benchmark of 102 actual, on-the-job tasks grounded in the explicit reasoning traces of professional hedge fund analysts working with relevant information sources. This approach enables deterministic grading against verified expert steps. Frontier models and agents score below 16% on the benchmark. We publish the dataset and evaluation harness at github.com/Trata-Inc/trata-hedge-bench.

Assessing the quality of time series (TS) data is fundamental yet inherently challenging due to the multifaceted nature of quality dimensions. Recently, large language models (LLMs) have emerged as a promising paradigm for TS quality assessment via pairwise comparison and per-dimension evaluation. However, existing approaches rely on manually predefined quality dimensions and purely text-based reasoning, leaving it unknown whether LLMs can identify truly relevant quality dimensions or perform grounded and quantitative quality comparisons. To investigate this, we construct TSQBench, a dedicated benchmark for evaluating LLMs on two progressive capabilities: (i) understanding and identifying relevant quality dimensions, and (ii) performing quality comparison under specific dimensions. Our analysis reveals that current LLMs consistently struggle with both dimension identification and evidence-grounded quality comparison. To address these limitations, we propose TSQAgent, a novel agentic reasoning framework for TS quality rating consisting of three collaborative roles: Perceiver for focused dimension selection, Inspector for dimension-wise quantitative analysis, and Adjudicator that aggregates and refines the final judgment. In particular, we introduce an agentic reasoning strategy that instills the ability to identify and prioritize the most relevant quality dimensions, and further propose an agent workflow equipped with external analytical tools to enable precise quantitative comparisons over selected dimensions. Experiments on both the proposed benchmark and eleven real-world datasets demonstrate that our framework not only substantially improves LLMs' capabilities in quality understanding and quantitative comparison but also effectively translates these improvements into better quality-aware data selection, leading to enhanced downstream performance and data efficiency.

Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) have substantially advanced mobile agents, yet proactive mobile assistance remains challenging because agents must decide when to intervene before determining how to assist. Existing systems often implement these two decisions within a unified MLLM-based pipeline, leading to goal misalignment between conservative intervention filtering and comprehensive assistance generation, as well as redundant inference when the agent should remain silent. To address these limitations, we propose the Pre-Reasoning Perception Framework (PRPF), a two-stage framework built on perceiving before reasoning. PRPF introduces a lightweight Multimodal Proactive Perceptor (MPP) for intervention gating and context compression, and activates the Proactive Agent Reasoner (PAR) only when intervention is warranted. Experiments on the ProactiveMobile benchmark show that PRPF substantially reduces false trigger rates (FTR) while improving success rates (SR) and inference efficiency over the ProactiveMobile baseline.

Deep Image Search requires multi-step reasoning over rich contextual cues, such as time, location, and event relations. However, most existing LLM-based agents are stateless and reactive, lacking persistent memory to maintain long-horizon context or transfer experience across tasks, which often leads to execution drift and experience isolation. To address these limitations, we propose PhotoCraft, a training-free, hierarchical memory system for photo-search agents. Inspired by human cognition, PhotoCraft equips MLLMs with working, episodic, and semantic memory, which are dynamically invoked during reasoning to preserve logical consistency and knowledge transferability throughout multi-step reasoning and answer generation. Extensive experiments on DISBench demonstrate that PhotoCraft consistently improves context-aware retrieval across diverse MLLM backbones, achieving gains of up to 18.5% and effectively mitigating key bottlenecks in memoryless deep image search, offering a practical path toward reliable and generalizable multimodal search agents.

ReAct-style LLM agents often rediscover the same reasoning routines across problems, yet leave those routines trapped in transient scratchpads. We introduce Reasoning Primitive Induction, a single-pass method that mines successful ReAct traces, clusters recurrent reasoning moves, and converts the most frequent moves into a compact library of typed pseudo-tools. Each pseudo-tool is specified by a natural-language docstring interpreted by an LLM at invocation time, and a standard ReAct loop composes these primitives at test time. The central result is that induced libraries outperform the very agent that generated their traces: by +44pp on RuleArena NBA (30 -> 74), +30pp on MuSR team allocation (38 -> 68), and +22pp on NatPlan meeting planning (7 -> 29). Across five comparable subtasks spanning narrative deduction, rule application, and constraint-satisfaction planning, a single fixed configuration improves over zero-shot Chain-of-Thought on every subtask, matches or surpasses expert-authored decompositions, and outperforms AWM at lower average inference cost.

Large reasoning models improve performance by generating extended chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning, but this behavior becomes inefficient when applied to LLM agents. Current LLM agents often generate verbose textual reasoning at every decision step and allocate reasoning effort nearly uniformly across turns, leading to substantial inefficiency in multi-turn agentic trajectories. We propose Adaptive Latent Agentic Reasoning (ALAR), a dual-mode framework that uses compact latent reasoning for routine turns and selectively escalates to explicit chain-of-thought when deeper deliberation is needed. ALAR learns latent reasoning by using the agent's actions as supervision anchors and is further optimized to use latent reasoning when it is sufficient for task success and reserve explicit CoT for harder decisions. Experiments on agentic search and tool-use benchmarks show that ALAR maintains comparable or better task accuracy while substantially reducing generated tokens by up to 43.6% in search and 84.6% in tool use. These results demonstrate that ALAR improves the accuracy-efficiency trade-off of LLM agents by reducing unnecessary textual reasoning while preserving explicit deliberation for harder decision steps.

Diagnosing Quality-of-Experience (QoE) degradations in operational Radio Access Networks (RANs) is a critical but notoriously complex task, traditionally requiring labor-intensive expert analysis over high-dimensional, cross-layer telemetry. While Large Language Models (LLMs) offer unprecedented reasoning capabilities, they are fundamentally unsuited for raw RANs troubleshooting: they fail at numeric time-series analysis, hallucinate protocol-violating causal links, and lack the stateful rigor required for multi-step fault localization. To bridge this gap, we present QoEReasoner, an end-to-end, LLM-driven agentic system designed for automated and explainable QoE diagnosis. QoEReasoner tames the inherent unpredictability of LLMs by grounding their reasoning in the physical realities of the network. It employs deterministic tools to reliably translate raw numeric KPIs into structured evidence, enforces protocol-consistent fault propagation through a domain-specific Knowledge Base, and leverages a Historical Bank of expert-validated cases to guide hypothesis generation. A stateful central planner orchestrates this closed-loop process across anomaly detection, causal tracing, and root-cause localization. Evaluations on real-world operational RANs datasets demonstrate that QoEReasoner outperforms strong baselines by 18%-40% in accuracy across multiple diagnostic tasks. Furthermore, it reduces diagnostic time from approximately 30 minutes of manual expert analysis to just 3 minutes per session, delivering highly interpretable, expert-grade reports while remaining robust across diverse LLM backbones.

Current benchmarks for embodied vision-language planning often favor linguistic next-token prediction over physically grounded next-state reasoning. This rewards models that mimic statistical language priors rather than track causal dependencies, reducing physical planning to shallow sequence modeling. We argue that reliable physical autonomy requires a shift from linguistically grounded token prediction toward physically grounded causal reasoning. To this end, we introduce Causal-Plan-Bench, a high-fidelity diagnostic suite curated through multi-stage verification to evaluate embodied planning across four causal dimensions. We also construct Causal-Plan-1M, a million-scale corpus of explicit reasoning traces produced by a four-stage annotation pipeline over egocentric videos. Extensive evaluation shows that leading models still struggle to demonstrate genuine physical agency, with Gemini 3 Pro reaching only 38.18 on our benchmark. In contrast, our training recipe enables Causal Planner, built on Qwen3-VL-8B, to internalize physical logic for more accurate next-state estimation. The model achieves strong in-domain performance and cross-benchmark generalization, and reveals a Causal Scaling Law: scaling causal training data to one million instances yields a 36.3% relative gain, from 33.22 to 45.28. Overall, our work provides a concrete step toward turning agents from superficial token predictors into physically grounded causal reasoners.

Clinical order generation serves as a critical bridge between clinical decision-making and real-world practice, translating medical decisions into concrete and executable orders. Existing agents mainly focus on coarse-grained decisions and overlook the fine-grained, executable information required for clinical orders. To address this gap, we propose CAREAgent, an agent for clinical order generation. To support its training, we introduce a two-stage agentic reasoning data construction method. First, we design an agent framework that constructs verifiable reasoning trajectories aligned with realistic clinical tool usage. Second, we filter reasoning trajectories by format compliance, order validity, and clinical plausibility. Building on the constructed data, the model is first trained via supervised fine-tuning to acquire fundamental reasoning formats and medical knowledge, and is subsequently optimized through reinforcement learning with multi-dimensional reward functions to enhance complex clinical reasoning capabilities. Experiments on multiple benchmarks demonstrate the effectiveness of CAREAgent. On ClinicalBench (unseen during training), CAREAgent improves the F1 score by 5.05%, 2.09%, and 0.86% over the single-agent, multi-agent, and agentic reasoning methods, respectively.

Theory of Mind (ToM) enables an agent to reason about another actor's beliefs, goals, and intentions, which is essential for human-centered embodied assistance. Existing ToM benchmarks have advanced text and multimodal mental-state recognition, but they mostly evaluate offline question answering or final action prediction. They do not fully test whether an embodied agent can stay connected to a changing environment, update actor-specific beliefs, decide when reasoning is needed, and intervene only when help is useful. Building on MindPower, we extend robot-centric ToM reasoning to a real-time closed-loop setting and introduce MindClaw, a framework for embodied mental-state reasoning with precision intervention. MindClaw connects multi-source inputs, belief memory, an embodied cognitive trigger skill, mental reasoning, and action generation, allowing the agent to output helpful actions at the right time while remaining silent when intervention is unnecessary. Experiments show that direct VLM baselines struggle with task awareness and intervention calibration, while MindClaw achieves the best overall performance, demonstrating the importance of trigger-skill optimization for closed-loop embodied ToM assistance.

Extended chain-of-thought reasoning can degrade performance on deterministic state-tracking tasks, not due to preference biases, but limits rooted in the information-theoretic capacity of decoder-only attention. We establish: (1) an Attention Bottleneck Theorem with a complementary achievability construction, bounding state-tracking capacity as $O(H \cdot \log(L/H) \cdot \sqrt{d_h})$; (2) a context-dependent error model yielding super-exponential accuracy decay; (3) the State-Space Jaccard metric distinguishing capability from preference failures; (4) a Deterministic Horizon $d^* \in [19, 31]$ beyond which tool delegation becomes necessary. Across 12 models and 8 task domains (including SWE-Bench, WebArena, and SQL-Multi), tool-integrated reasoning consistently outperforms neural chain-of-thought; on the primary model suite it reaches 86-94% accuracy versus 24-42% for neural chain-of-thought. Fine-tuning on optimal-length traces yields $<$5% improvement, confirming an architectural ceiling, and high cross-model correlation ($r = 0.81$-$0.91$) indicates these failures are architectural rather than training-specific. Our results provide principled guidance for when pure neural reasoning should yield to hybrid approaches in agentic systems.

Effective real-world assistance requires AI agents with robust Theory of Mind (ToM): inferring human mental states from their behavior. Despite recent advances, several key challenges remain, including (1) online inference with robust uncertainty updates over multiple hypotheses; (2) efficient reasoning suitable for real-time assistance; and (3) the lack of ground-truth mental state annotations in real-world domains. We address these challenges by introducing MindZero, a self-supervised reinforcement learning framework that trains multimodal large language models (MLLMs) for efficient and robust online mental reasoning. During training, the model is rewarded for generating mental state hypotheses that maximize the likelihood of observed actions estimated by a planner, similar to model-based ToM reasoning. This method thus eliminates the need for explicit mental state annotations. After training, MindZero internalizes model-based reasoning into fast single-pass inference. We evaluate MindZero against baselines across challenging mental reasoning and AI assistance tasks in gridworld and household domains. We found that LLMs alone are insufficient; model-based methods improve accuracy but are slow, costly, and limited by backbone MLLM capacity. In contrast, MindZero enhances MLLMs' intrinsic ToM ability and significantly outperforms model-based methods in both accuracy and efficiency, showing that mental reasoning can be effectively learned as a self-supervised skill.

Agentic Retrieval-Augmented Generation improves retrieval by integrating planning, tool use, and iterative reasoning, but existing agentic RAG methods often couple semantic expansion with retrieval decisions in short-horizon inference loops, leading to high inference cost and limited suitability for time-sensitive news retrieval. We propose DynaTree, a two-stage framework for efficient and adaptive news retrieval. In the offline stage, DynaTree uses coordinated agents to construct a reusable retrieval tree that materializes the semantic space of a query topic. In the online stage, DynaTree performs lightweight daily subtree selection over a time-localized evaluation proxy, without further agentic reasoning, tree modification, or retraining. Experiments on a multi-day Syft news benchmark and multiple BEIR datasets show that DynaTree achieves strong recall and ranking performance, consistently outperforming standard RAG and prior agentic baselines. We further deploy DynaTree in the Syft production system and evaluate it through online A/B testing from Jan. 28 to Feb. 6, 2026. The dynamically adapted variant improves survival rate from 0.32-0.53 to 0.59-0.73 over a fixed offline-selected subtree and outperforms existing production recallers on every evaluation day. These results show that persistent, structure-aware semantic expansion can translate offline agentic reasoning into practical improvements in coverage, freshness, and relevance for real-world news retrieval.

Abductive reasoning over knowledge graphs aims to generate logical hypotheses that explain observed entities or facts. Existing controllable hypothesis generation methods allow users to guide this process with explicit conditions, but they remain limited in interactive settings: they struggle to ground evolving natural-language intents across multi-turn dialogues and provide little fine-grained diagnosis when generated hypotheses fail. To address these limitations, we propose HypoAgent, an Agentic framework for interactive abductive Hypothesis Generation over knowledge graphs. HypoAgent integrates three agents: an Intent Recognition Agent that grounds user utterances and dialogue history into executable KG conditions, a Hypothesis Generation Agent that performs controllable hypothesis generation according to the extracted user intention, and a Root Cause Analysis Agent that diagnoses unreliable hypothesis fragments and leverages KG neighborhood probing to identify supported refinements. Experiments on commonsense and biomedical domain-specific knowledge graphs demonstrate that HypoAgent achieves state-of-the-art semantic similarity under single-turn, multi-turn, and unconditional settings. Our code is available at https://github.com/HKUST-KnowComp/HypoAgent.

Generalization across agentic tool-calling environments remains a central challenge for reliable agentic reasoning systems. Although large language models achieve strong results on individual benchmarks, their ability to compose reasoning strategies, preserve intermediate states, and coordinate tools across domains remains underexplored. We present MAVEN (Modular Agentic Verification and Execution Network), a lightweight symbolic reasoning scaffold for structured decomposition, adaptive tool orchestration, and intermediate verification. We evaluate MAVEN across established tool-calling benchmarks, including BFCL v3, TauBench, Tau2Bench, AceBench, and introduce MAVEN-Bench, a stress-test benchmark for multi-step mathematical and physical reasoning with explicit verification and adversarial task composition. MAVEN-Bench exposes a substantial gap between partial reasoning quality and end-to-end task success; in direct MAVEN-Bench runs, MAVEN improves its GPT-OSS-120b base model from 48% to 71% accuracy without additional training. It also remains competitive with frontier proprietary baselines while using an open-weight backbone with an estimated cost ratio of roughly 1/10, suggesting that lightweight verification-centered scaffolds can strengthen compositional reasoning and motivate more process-aware evaluation of agents in the wild.

Vision-language models with extended reasoning succeed on complex problems, but many real-world problems require external tools that internal reasoning alone often cannot resolve. Agentic reasoning therefore interleaves two behaviors with a structural asymmetry: thinking (the self-contained default) and tool use (a high-variance auxiliary acting). We refer to this asymmetry as the Thinking-Acting Gap. Under standard RL recipes like GRPO, the gap manifests as two diagnostic symptoms during training: tool use is attempted on only ~30% of rollouts, and when attempted, the tool-using rollouts within a group are all-wrong on ~40% of questions, suppressing the learning signal at the tool calls that needed it. We propose AXPO (Agent eXplorative Policy Optimization): for each all-wrong tool-using subgroup, AXPO fixes the thinking prefix and resamples the tool call and its continuation, paired with uncertainty-based prefix selection. Across nine multimodal benchmarks and three scales of Qwen3-VL-Thinking, SFT+AXPO outperforms SFT+GRPO at average (+1.8pp Pass@1 and +1.8pp Pass@4 at 8B on average) and 8B with SFT+AXPO surpasses the 32B Base on Pass@4 with 4 times fewer parameters.

Understanding what a user believes and intends is central to building effective agent assistants. This ability is often evaluated through Theory-of-Mind (ToM) tasks, where success requires reasoning from the user's perspective. However, many existing approaches address ToM with complex pipelines that model behavior indirectly, without explicitly reconstructing the user's mental state. This misses the core structure of the problem: users act based on their beliefs, which are updated through observations of the environment; beliefs and intentions jointly determine actions, which in turn change the environment; and social reasoning often requires nested beliefs about what others believe or intend. We propose UserHarness, a simple framework that reframes ToM reasoning as explicit user-mind reconstruction. UserHarness decomposes the user's mental state, its relation to the external environment, and the actions that follow from it, enabling agents to track what the user observes, believes, intends, and does. Across five benchmarks, UserHarness reaches up to 95.94% macro accuracy, improving over existing inference methods by more than 15% relative and over the strongest prompt-only harness by about 20% relative. These results suggest that robust user understanding requires reasoning from the roots of the user's mind, positioning user harnessing as a promising foundation for more adaptive future assistants.

Deep research agents face vast, interdependent, and pervasively uncertain information. Existing systems explore what evolving intermediate representations should look like, but leave their evolution to the LLM's implicit reasoning. Without explicit regulation, the intermediate layer is easily contaminated by mixed-quality information, and errors propagate along its dependencies, so model scale often ends up substituting for absent regulation. We argue that an agent's mental model should instead evolve through explicit feedback that continuously aligns task understanding with reality, and identify three regulatory loops: interpretive update, deviation feedback, and schema revision. We realise this in VeriTrace, a cognitive-graph framework that explicitly implements the three loops. Using matched Qwen3.5-27B backbones, VeriTrace improves over the strongest matched baseline by an average of 4.82 pp on DeepResearch Bench (DRB) Insight (1.83 pp Overall) and by 5.9 pp Overall win rate on DeepConsult. With Config-DeepSeek, it achieves the strongest reproducible open-source result on DRB.

We introduce CausaLab, a scalable environment for evaluating interactive causal discovery by LLM agents. Unlike prior evaluations, CausaLab evaluates both whether an agent can solve a problem using causal evidence and whether its answer is grounded in a faithful recovered causal mechanism. Each episode places an agent in a synthetic laboratory: it receives prior measurement records, intervenes on a manipulator crystal, and predicts the resonance frequency of a held-out reactor crystal governed by the same mechanism. The hidden data-generating process is a randomly sampled structural causal model (SCM), so success requires recovering both a causal graph and structural equations rather than recalling prior knowledge. Experiments show a persistent gap between prediction and mechanism recovery: in the purely observational 6-node setting, GPT-5.2-high reaches 92% task accuracy but only 0.471 all-edge $F_1$. Mixed observation-intervention strategies improve structural fidelity, while pure intervention remains difficult even for strong agents. We identify premature stopping as a major weakness and show that consistency verification mitigates it. CausaLab therefore separates predictive success from causal understanding and exposes current LLM agents' limits as experimental causal reasoners.

With the continuous advancement of Large Language Models (LLMs), intelligent agents are becoming increasingly vital. However, these agents often fail in environments governed by implicit rules--hidden constraints that cannot be observed directly and must be inferred through interaction. This causes agents to fall into repetitive trial-and-error loops, ultimately leading to task failure. To address this challenge, we propose Test-Time Exploration (TTExplore), a framework where a thinker component analyzes interaction history to infer these implicit rules and guide an actor. Effective exploration in this setting critically depends on the reasoning ability of the thinker. However, evaluating deep reasoning trajectories is inherently unstable and difficult, which poses a major obstacle to effective training. To overcome this issue, we introduce a novel and stable reinforcement learning pipeline. The core idea is to use accurate task-level scores as indirect rewards to bypass the difficulty of evaluating intermediate reasoning, and to retain only a single thinking node per trajectory to alleviate reward sparsity. Using this pipeline, we train a specialized 7B model, Exp-Thinker. Experiments on five text-based embodied tasks show that TTExplore equipped with Exp-Thinker improves baseline agent performance by an average of $14$-$19$ points, demonstrating the effectiveness of explicitly reasoning about implicit rules.

Long-horizon agentic reasoning requires large language models to act over long interaction histories containing thoughts, tool calls, observations, and partial conclusions. The challenge is not merely that these histories grow long, but that information needed for the current decision may be scattered across distant steps and only become relevant later. Existing approaches address this difficulty by truncating the interaction history, compressing it into shorter surrogates, or retrieving selected parts of it for reuse, but they do not explicitly model how access to past interaction should adapt to the agent's evolving state. We instead cast long-horizon reasoning as a problem of state-adaptive memory. To this end, we propose State-Adaptive Memory~(SAM), a standalone framework that consolidates ongoing interaction into compact memory cues while preserving raw trajectory pages for intent-driven recall. These cues are not treated as replacements for history; rather, they serve as lightweight handles that allow the agent to reconstruct temporally distant information according to its current needs, without retraining the underlying backbone. We further optimize the memory module through expert-guided supervision and reinforcement learning, aligning it with trajectory-level utility. Across BrowseComp, BrowseComp-ZH, WideSearch, and HLE, SAM consistently outperforms strong baselines over diverse agent backbones. Our results suggest that explicit memory modeling provides a simple and effective foundation for long-horizon agentic reasoning.

ReAct-style agents for search-intensive, multi-step reasoning tasks rely largely on their own internal judgment to decide what evidence to seek, which reasoning or action step to take next, and when to stop, often producing shallow, redundant, or poorly targeted trajectories. Prior work has explored rubrics as external quality signals, but existing uses are mostly evaluative rather than action-guiding: rubrics typically serve as training-time rewards or post-hoc evaluators of completed outputs, and in deep-research settings they are often coarse-grained and report-level rather than step-level. We introduce Co-ReAct, a rubric-guided action-selection framework that uses rubrics as step-level guidance during inference. At each decision step, Co-ReAct injects a rubric into the agent's context to guide the next Reason-or-Act decision, specifying what the agent should target in evidence seeking, search, reasoning, or self-evaluation. To make this guidance reliable, we train a dedicated rubric generator with GRPO. Unlike prior pairwise or binary preference formulations, our objective optimizes a list-wise Spearman rank-correlation reward against multi-judge expert consensus rankings, encouraging rubrics that are discriminative rather than merely plausible. On DeepResearchBench and SQA-CS-V2, Co-ReAct consistently improves over ReAct and representative test-time compute baselines across search agents built on both 8B/14B open-source and frontier closed-source base models. The trained rubric generator can also serve as a drop-in component that improves these baselines without changing their underlying decision mechanisms. Our code is publicly available at https://github.com/ZBWpro/Co-ReAct.

How should an agent decide when and how to plan? A dominant approach builds agents as reactive policies with adaptive computation (e.g., chain-of-thought), trained end-to-end expecting planning to emerge implicitly. Without control over the presence, structure, or horizon of planning, these systems dramatically increase reasoning length, yielding inefficient token use without reliable accuracy gains. We argue efficient agentic reasoning benefits from decomposing decision-making into three systems: simulative reasoning (System II) grounding deliberation in future-state prediction via a world model; self-regulation (System III) deciding when and how deeply to plan via a learned configurator; and reactive execution (System I) handling fine-grained action. Simulative reasoning provides unified planning across diverse tasks without per-domain engineering, while self-regulation ensures the planner is invoked only when needed. To test this, we develop SR$^2$AM (Self-Regulated Simulative Reasoning Agentic LLM), realizing both as distinct stages within an LLM's chain-of-thought, with the LLM as world model. We explore two instantiations: recording decisions from a prompted multi-module system (v0.1) and reconstructing structured plans from traces of pretrained reasoning LLMs (v1.0), trained via supervised then reinforcement learning (RL). Across math, science, tabular analysis, and web information seeking, v0.1-8B and v1.0-30B achieve Pass@1 competitive with 120-355B and 685B-1T parameter systems respectively, while v1.0-30B uses 25.8-95.3% fewer reasoning tokens than comparable agentic LLMs. RL increases average planning horizon by 22.8% while planning frequency grows only 2.0%, showing it learns to plan further ahead rather than more often. More broadly, learned self-regulation instantiates a principle we expect to extend beyond planning to how agents govern their own learning and adaptation.

Recent attempts to support high-level scene interpretation and planning in Autonomous Vehicles (AVs) using ensembles of Large Language Models (LLMs) and Large Multimodal Models (LMMs) continue to treat time as a secondary property. This lack of temporal grounding leads to inconsistencies in reasoning about continuous actions, undermining both safety and interpretability. This work explores whether temporal conditioning within inter-agent communication can preserve or enhance coherence without introducing degradation in semantic or logical consistency. To investigate this, we introduce three planner architectures with progressively increasing temporal integration and evaluate them on curated subsets of the BDD-X dataset using semantic, syntactic, and logical metrics. Results show that while temporal conditioning reshapes reasoning style, it yields no statistically significant improvements in standard NLP-based correctness metrics. However, qualitative analysis reveals predictive hazard reasoning, stable corrective behavior, and strategic divergence in the Sentinel. These findings clarify the limits of prompt-based temporal grounding and establish the first empirical benchmark for temporal scene-to-plan reasoning.

Query optimization in big data analytics remains computationally expensive, particularly for resource-constrained environments where traditional optimizers fail to satisfy memory and latency constraints. We present an agentic query planning system that combines a rule-based teacher planner, UCB1 bandit exploration, cost-aware prediction, and knowledge distillation to a lightweight student planner. Our teacher planner generates SQL plans using six key optimization strategies, while UCB1 bandit search efficiently explores the plan space under explicit resource constraints. A Random Forest cost model predicts query latency from plan features, enabling cost-aware decisions. A distilled student planner (Logistic Regression or Gradient Boosting) learns to mimic teacher-bandit decisions for fast inference. Evaluation on NYC Taxi and IMDB datasets demonstrates 23% latency reduction compared to default planners while maintaining 94% constraint satisfaction. The student planner achieves 89% accuracy in replicating optimal plans with 15x faster inference time. Our single-file implementation enables reproducible big-data analytics on resource-limited machines and is publicly available at https://github.com/mahdinaser/agentic-kd-planner.

Modern reasoning agents are increasingly evaluated on their ability to generate multiple valid solution paths, plans, or tool-use traces for a given input. Standard reward-maximizing RL tends to collapse onto the most easily reinforced high-reward mode, whereas distribution-matching RL aims to allocate probability mass across the entire reward-shaped solution set. Achieving this objective requires computing a prompt-dependent partition function over the trajectory space. Because existing distribution-matching methods learn this partition function online alongside the policy, calibration errors in the partition function directly distort policy updates and remain impossible to diagnose independently. We introduce DISA, short for Decoupled Importance-Sampled Anchoring, which moves this calibration problem outside the RL loop. DISA draws proposal trajectories offline, estimates the partition function via importance sampling, and freezes the resulting partition-function estimate before policy optimization begins. This decoupling preserves the distribution-matching objective while strictly separating partition-function estimation from policy learning in data, gradients, loss, and diagnostics. Empirically, on two open-weight backbones across six math and three code benchmarks, DISA matches or exceeds the online-coupled distribution-matching baseline FlowRL, outperforms rewardmaximization baselines GRPO and GSPO on math averages, and exceeds LoRASFT distillation by up to 13.8 Mean@8 points on the same offline trajectories. An LLM-as-judge evaluation further shows that DISA retains substantially more strategy-level diversity than reward-maximization baselines, and sensitivity studies on the proposal strength and inverse temperature follow the bias-variance pattern predicted by the analysis.

Visual reasoning, often interleaved with intermediate visual states, has emerged as a promising direction in the field. A straightforward approach is to directly generate images via unified models during reasoning, but this is computationally expensive and architecturally non-trivial. Recent alternatives include agentic reasoning through code or tool calls, and latent reasoning with learnable hidden embeddings. However, agentic methods incur context-switching latency from external execution, while latent methods lack task generalization and are difficult to train with autoregressive parallelization. To combine their strengths while mitigating their limitations, we propose ATLAS, a framework in which a single discrete 'word', termed as a functional token, serves both as an agentic operation and a latent visual reasoning unit. Each functional token is associated with an internalized visual operation, yet requires no visual supervision and remains a standard token in the tokenizer vocabulary, which can be generated via next-token prediction. This design avoids verbose intermediate visual content generation, while preserving compatibility with the vanilla scalable SFT and RL training, without architectural or methodological modifications. To further address the sparsity of functional tokens during RL, we introduce Latent-Anchored GRPO (LA-GRPO), which stabilizes the training by anchoring functional tokens with a statically weighted auxiliary objective, providing stronger gradient updates. Extensive experiments and analyses demonstrate that ATLAS achieves superior performance on challenging benchmarks while maintaining clear interpretability. We hope ATLAS offers a new paradigm inspiring future visual reasoning research.

Applying Large Language Models (LLMs) to heterogeneous enterprise systems is hindered by hallucinations and failures in multi-hop, n-ary reasoning. Existing paradigms (e.g., GraphRAG, NL2SQL) lack the semantic grounding and auditable execution required for these complex environments. We introduce HEAR, an enterprise agentic reasoner built on a Stratified Hypergraph Ontology. Its base Graph Layer virtualizes provenance-aware data interfaces, while the Hyperedge Layer encodes n-ary business rules and procedural protocols. Operating an evidence-driven reasoning loop, HEAR dynamically orchestrates ontology tools for structured multi-hop analysis without requiring LLM retraining. Evaluations on supply-chain tasks, including order fulfillment blockage root cause analysis (RCA), show HEAR achieves up to 94.7% accuracy. Crucially, HEAR demonstrates adaptive efficiency: utilizing procedural hyperedges to minimize token costs, while leveraging topological exploration for rigorous correctness on complex queries. By matching proprietary model performance with open-weight backbones and automating manual diagnostics, HEAR establishes a scalable, auditable foundation for enterprise intelligence.

Large language models achieve strong performance in language generation and knowledge-intensive tasks, yet remain limited in settings requiring causal reasoning, persistent state tracking, and long-horizon planning. We argue that these limitations may arise from an objective-level mismatch between sequence prediction and reasoning over latent environment dynamics. To formalize this distinction, we introduce Latent Dynamics Inference (LDI), a conceptual perspective that interprets language and multimodal observations as partial evidence of underlying transition dynamics. To empirically investigate this perspective, we introduce Flux, a sequential reasoning environment specified entirely through natural-language rules. As a proof-of-concept case study, the rules are first compiled into an explicit state-transition simulator, illustrating that structured latent transition dynamics can, in some cases, be operationally extracted from textual rule descriptions. This enables a controlled comparison between the LLMs operating purely over textual observations and reinforcement-learning agents trained directly within the extracted latent state space. Within this case study, agents operating with explicit access to the latent state space exhibit substantially more stable behavior in long-horizon gameplay, achieving an aggregate win rate of approximately 79% versus 11% for LLMs. Qualitative analysis further reveals failure modes consistent with unstable persistent state tracking, including invalid actions, state-tracking errors, and short-horizon reasoning failures. The complete implementation of the Flux environment available at https://github.com/FeisalAlaswad/FLUX-RL-Agent Within the evaluated setting, these results suggest that strong sequence prediction alone may struggle to support robust long-horizon dynamic reasoning without mechanisms for persistent state tracking and transition modeling

There is a growing demand for agentic AI technologies for a range of downstream applications like customer service and personal assistants. For applications where the agent needs to interact with a person, real-time low-latency responsiveness is required; for example, with voice-controlled applications, under 1 second of latency is typically required for the interaction to feel seamless. However, if we want the LLM to reason and execute an agentic workflow with tool calling, this can add several seconds or more of latency, which is prohibitive for real-time latency-sensitive applications. In our work, we propose Speculative Interaction Agents to enable real-time interaction even for agents with complex multi-turn tool calling. We propose Asynchronous I/O, which decouples the core agent reason-and-act thread from waiting for additional information from either the user or environment, thereby allowing for overlapping agentic processing while waiting on external delays. We also propose Speculative Tool Calling as a method to manage task execution when the agent is still unsure if it has received the full information or if additional user information may later be provided. For strong cloud models, our method can be applied out-of-the-box to existing real-time cloud APIs, providing 1.3-1.7$\times$ speedups with minor accuracy loss. To enable real-time interaction with small edge-scale models, we also present a clock-based training methodology that adapts the model to handle streaming inputs and asynchronous responses, and demonstrate a synthetic data generation strategy for SFT. Altogether, this approach provides 1.6-2.2$\times$ speedups with the Qwen2.5-3B-Instruct and Llama-3.2-3B-Instruct models across multiple tool calling benchmarks.

Graph reasoning agents operating from natural-language inputs must solve a coupled problem: they must reconstruct a structured graph instance from text, decide whether existing computational assets are sufficient, interact with tools under a strict execution protocol, and satisfy an external verifier that checks structured correctness rather than textual plausibility. Existing approaches usually improve either the instruction side or the tool side in isolation, which leaves unclear what should be updated after failure. We propose EGL-SCA, a verifier-centric dual-space framework that models a graph reasoning agent using two collaborative components: an instruction-side policy space for reasoning strategies, and a tool-side program space for executable algorithmic tools. Our central mechanism is structural credit assignment, which maps trajectory evidence to conditional updates, precisely routing failures to either prompt optimization or tool synthesis and repair. To provide sufficient learning signals for dual-space adaptation, we introduce a training distribution stratified by task family, coupled with a Pareto-style retention strategy to balance success, generality, and parsimony. Experiments on four graph reasoning benchmarks show that EGL-SCA achieves a state-of-the-art 92.0% average success rate. By effectively co-evolving instructions and tools, our framework significantly outperforms both pure-prompting and fixed-toolbox baselines.

Reinforcement learning from verifiable rewards (RLVR) has improved the reasoning abilities of large language models (LLMs), but most existing approaches rely on sparse outcome-level feedback. This sparsity creates a credit assignment challenge in long-horizon agentic reasoning: a trajectory may fail despite containing many correct intermediate decisions, or succeed despite containing flawed ones. In this work, we study a class of densely-verifiable agentic reasoning problems, where intermediate actions can be objectively checked by symbolic or algorithmic oracles. We propose Verifiable Process Rewards (VPR), a framework that converts such oracles into dense turn-level supervision for reinforcement learning, and instantiate it in three representative settings: search-based verification for dynamic deduction, constraint-based verification for logical reasoning, and posterior-based verification for probabilistic inference. We further provide a theoretical analysis showing that dense verifier-grounded rewards can improve long-horizon credit assignment by providing more localized learning signals, with the benefit depending on the reliability of the verifier. Empirically, VPR outperforms outcome-level reward and rollout-based process reward baselines across controlled environments, and more importantly, transfers to both general and agentic reasoning benchmarks, suggesting that verifiable process supervision can foster general reasoning skills applicable beyond the training environments. Our results indicate that VPR is a promising approach for enhancing LLM agents whenever reliable intermediate verification is available, while also highlighting its dependence on oracle quality and the open challenge of extending VPR to less structured, open-ended environments.

While reasoning has become a central capability of large language models (LLMs), the reasoning patterns required for different scenarios are often misaligned. Mathematical reasoning typically relies on intrinsic logic to solve closed-world problems in a single response, whereas agentic reasoning requires not only internal reasoning but also multi-turn interaction with external environments, interleaving thought and action. This misalignment prevents mathematical and agentic reasoning from effectively benefiting from each other, often yielding unstable reasoning behavior and only limited performance gains under multi-task learning. In this paper, we propose M2A, a novel paradigm that synergizes mathematical and agentic reasoning via model merging. To avoid overfitting to superficial reasoning patterns under joint training, M2A operates directly in parameter space: it identifies the feature subspace critical for agent behavior, and merges the mathematical reasoning task vector only along its null space, thereby injecting reasoning capability along directions that do not perturb agent behavior. Unlike SFT or RL, M2A requires no additional gradient-update and exposes the merging coefficient as a simple knob for controlling reasoning length. Experiments in a challenging real-world coding agent setting show that our method effectively extends agentic reasoning depth and delivers substantial performance improvements. Applied to a fine-tuned Qwen3-8B, M2A improves its SWE-Bench Verified resolved rate from 44.0% to 51.2% without retraining the model. Code is available at https://github.com/laplucky/M2A.git.

In this paper, we propose the first VL$\underline{\textbf{M}}$ $\underline{\textbf{a}}$gentic $\underline{\textbf{r}}$easoning framework for few-$\underline{\textbf{s}}$hot multimodal $\underline{\textbf{T}}$ime $\underline{\textbf{S}}$eries $\underline{\textbf{C}}$lassification ($\textbf{MarsTSC}$), which introduces a self-evolving knowledge bank as a dynamic context iteratively refined via reflective agentic reasoning. The framework comprises three collaborative roles: i) Generator conducts reliable classification via reasoning; ii) Reflector diagnoses the root causes of reasoning errors to yield discriminative insights targeting the temporal features overlooked by Generator; iii) Modifier applies verified updates to the knowledge bank to prevent context collapse. We further introduce a test-time update strategy to enable cautious, continuous knowledge bank refinement to mitigate few-shot bias and distribution shift. Extensive experiments across 12 mainstream time series benchmarks demonstrate that $\textbf{MarsTSC}$ delivers substantial and consistent performance gains across 6 VLM backbones, outperforming both classical and foundation model-based time series baselines under few-shot conditions, while producing interpretable rationales that ground each classification decision in human-readable feature evidence.

Recent advancements in agentic test-time scaling allow models to gather environmental feedback before committing to final actions. A key limitation of existing methods is that they typically employ undifferentiated exploration strategies, lacking the ability to adaptively distinguish when exploration is truly required. In this paper, we propose an exploration-aware reinforcement learning framework that enables LLM agents to adaptively explore only when uncertainty is high. Our method introduces a fine-grained reward function via variational inference that explicitly evaluates exploratory actions by estimating their potential to improve future decision-making, together with an exploration-aware grouping mechanism that separates exploratory actions from task-completion actions during optimization. By targeting informational gaps, this design allows agents to explore selectively and transition to execution as soon as the task context is clear. Empirically, we demonstrate that our approach achieves consistent improvements across a range of challenging text-based and GUI-based agent benchmarks. Code is available at https://github.com/HansenHua/EAPO-ICML26 and models are available at https://huggingface.co/hansenhua/EAPO-ICML26.

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed as autonomous agents that execute tool-augmented, multi-step tasks, where latency is a critical factor for real-world applications. Yet an overlooked threat is Reasoning-Level Denial-of-Service (R-DoS), in which an attacker preserves task correctness but degrades availability by inflating an agent's reasoning depth or tool-use budget. We introduce OTora, the first unified, two-stage red-teaming framework for instantiating R-DoS attacks. Stage I optimizes an adversarial trigger that induces targeted tool invocations using insertion-aware scoring and dynamic target co-evolution, supporting both black-box and white-box settings. Stage II generates agent-aware reasoning payloads via an ICL-guided genetic search that amplifies overthinking while maintaining correct task outcomes. Across WebShop, Email, and OS agents built on multiple backbone models such as LLaMA-70B and GPT-OSS-120B, OTora achieves up to 10 times increases in reasoning tokens and order-of-magnitude latency slowdowns, all while preserving near-baseline task accuracy. Finally, we discuss mitigation strategies for detecting and constraining abnormal reasoning and latency spikes. The code is available at https://github.com/llm2409/OTora.

We study how to allocate inference-time compute for competitive programming under fixed budgets. Evaluating 216 Codeforces problems across Divisions 1-3, we compare agent-based reasoning with repeated independent sampling (k-shot) as a function of both cost and number of model calls. Across models and difficulty levels, k-shot consistently achieves a better accuracy-cost and accuracy-query tradeoff. This gap persists despite prompt caching in agent frameworks, indicating lower per-call effectiveness. Our results show that, for self-contained algorithmic tasks, independent exploration can outperform deeper agentic reasoning under realistic resource constraints. We also provide a budget-allocation analysis when the inference budget is fixed, and prove that a cost-optimal solver minimizes the principled metric log failure likelihood per dollar.

Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable reasoning capabilities, largely stimulated by Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR). However, existing RL algorithms face a fundamental limitation: their exploration remains largely constrained by the inherent capability boundary of the policy model. Although recent methods introduce external expert demonstrations to extend this boundary, they typically rely on complete trajectory-level guidance, which is sample-inefficient, information-sparse, and may confine exploration to a static guidance space. Inspired by the potential of multi-agent systems, we propose $\textbf{AIPO}$, an enhanced reinforcement learning framework that improves LLM reasoning through active multi-agent interaction during exploration. Specifically, AIPO enables the policy model to proactively consult three functional collaborative agents, $\textit{Verify Agent}$, $\textit{Knowledge Agent}$, and $\textit{Reasoning Agent}$, when encountering reasoning bottlenecks, thereby receiving fine-grained and targeted guidance to actively expand its capability boundary during training. We further introduce a tailored importance sampling coefficient together with a clipping strategy to mitigate the off-policy bias and gradient vanishing issues that arise when learning from agent-provided feedback. After training, the policy model performs reasoning independently without relying on collaborative agents. Extensive experiments on diverse reasoning benchmarks, including AIME, MATH500, GPQA-Diamond, and LiveCodeBench, show that AIPO consistently improves reasoning performance, generalizes robustly across different policy models and RLVR algorithms, and effectively expands the reasoning capability boundary of the policy model.

Tool-integrated reasoning (TIR) is difficult to scale to small language models due to instability in long-horizon tool interactions and limited model capacity. While reinforcement learning methods like group relative policy optimization provide only sparse outcome-level rewards. Recently, on-policy distillation (OPD) has gained popularity by supplying dense token-level supervision from a teacher on student-generated trajectories. However, our experiments indicate that applying OPD to TIR leads to a critical failure mode: erroneous tool calls tend to cascade across subsequent reasoning steps, progressively amplifying student-teacher divergence and rendering the teacher's token-level supervision increasingly unreliable. To address this, we propose SOD, a step-wise on-policy distillation framework for small language model agents, which adaptively reweights distillation strength at each step based on step-level divergence. Therefore, SOD can attenuate potentially misleading teacher signals in high-divergence regions while preserving dense guidance in well-aligned states. Experiments on challenging math, science, and code benchmarks show that SOD achieves up to 20.86% improvement over the second-best baseline. Notably, our 0.6B student achieves 26.13% on AIME 2025, demonstrating effective transfer of agentic reasoning to lightweight models. Our code is available at https://github.com/YoungZ365/SOD.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable capabilities in orchestrating tools for reasoning tasks. However, existing methods rely on a step-wise paradigm that lacks a global perspective, which causes error accumulation over long horizons and restricts generalization to unseen tools. To overcome these limitations, we propose Tools as Continuous Flow for Evolving Agentic Reasoning (FlowAgent), which reconceptualizes tool chaining as continuous trajectory generation within a semantic space. To systematically evaluate this paradigm, we introduce the first plan-level closed-loop benchmark dedicated to plan-level agentic reasoning in dynamic real-world environments. Specifically, the proposed FlowAgent leverages conditional flow matching to generate continuous latent trajectories, providing a global planning perspective to ensure coherent and robust tool execution. Theoretically, we establish formal bounds on utility convergence and prove that our continuous formulation fundamentally guarantees robust generalization and error attenuation. Empirical evaluations show that FlowAgent achieves superior robustness and adaptability in long-horizon reasoning tasks.

Large Language Model (LLM) agents are deployed in complex environments -- such as massive codebases, enterprise databases, and conversational histories -- where the relevant state far exceeds their context windows. To navigate these spaces, an agent must iteratively explore the environment to find relevant information. However, without explicit infrastructure, an agent's working memory can degrade into lossy representations of the search state, resulting in redundant work (e.g. repetitive looping) and premature stopping. In this work, we formalize this challenge as the Context Gathering Decision Process (CGDP), a specialized Partially Observable Markov Decision Process, where an agent's objective is to adaptively refine its belief state to isolate the necessary information for a task. We model an LLM's behavior as approximate Thompson Sampling within this CGDP, and introduce a predicate-based method that decomposes an LLM's implicit search into explicit and modular operations. We then derive two plug-and-play interventions for iterative LLM agents: a persistent, predicate-based belief state that bounds context while preserving multi-hop reasoning, and a programmatic exhaustion gate that halts unproductive search without premature stopping. Across four methods and three question-answering domains, we empirically validate that replacing an LLM's implicit state with our CGDP-motivated belief state improves multi-hop reasoning by up to $11.4\%$; while the modular programmatic exhaustion detection saves up to $39\%$ of tokens without any degradation in agent performance. Ultimately, we argue that framing the LLM agent loop as a CGDP can guide the design of modular, non-interfering improvements to agentic search harnesses.

As large language models (LLMs) show increasing promise on research-level physics reasoning tasks and agentic AI becomes more common, a practical question emerges: How does the interaction between researchers and agents affect the results? We study this using SCALAR (Structured Critic--Actor Loop for AI Reasoning), an Actor--Critic--Judge pipeline applied to quantum field theory and string theory problems. The Actor proposes solutions, the Critic provides iterative feedback, and an independent Judge evaluates the transcript against reference solutions. We vary the Actor persona, the Critic feedback strategy, and the Actor model family and scale. Multi-turn dialogue improves over single-shot attempts throughout, but both the mechanism of improvement and the value of different prompting choices depend strongly on the Actor--Critic pairing. Increasing the scale within one model family (e.g. from the 8B-parameter DeepSeek-R1 variant to DeepSeek-R1 70B) improves some easier-problem behavior, but does not remove the hardest bottleneck we observe. Critic feedback strategy matters most clearly in the asymmetric Actor--Critic setting (e.g., a lightweight Haiku Actor guided by a stronger Sonnet Critic), where constructive feedback improves mean-score outcomes. In same-family Actor--Critic settings, strategy effects are weaker: lenient feedback is sometimes favored, while strict and adversarial feedback are not beneficial. Taken together, SCALAR provides a controlled testbed for evaluating which interaction structures help or hinder AI-driven scientific discovery.

Large language models increasingly operate in interactive settings where solving a task requires multiple rounds of information exchange with a user. However, most current systems treat dialogue reactively and lack a principled mechanism to reason about what information is missing and which question should be asked next. We propose BALAR (Bayesian Agentic Loop for Active Reasoning), a task-agnostic outer-loop algorithm that requires no fine-tuning and enables structured multi-turn interaction between an LLM agent and a user. BALAR maintains a structured belief over latent states, selects clarifying questions by maximizing expected mutual information, and dynamically expands its state representation when the current one proves insufficient. We evaluate BALAR on three diverse benchmarks: AR-Bench-DC (detective cases), AR-Bench-SP (thinking puzzles), and iCraft-MD (clinical diagnosis). BALAR significantly outperforms all baselines across all three benchmarks, with $14.6\%$ higher accuracy on AR-Bench-DC, $38.5\%$ on AR-Bench-SP, and $30.5\%$ on iCraft-MD.

Recent advances in agentic harness with orchestration frameworks that coordinate multiple agents with memory, skills, and tool use have achieved remarkable success in complex reasoning tasks. However, the underlying mechanism that truly drives performance remains obscured behind intricate system designs. In this paper, we propose HeavySkill, a perspective that views heavy thinking not only as a minimal execution unit in orchestration harness but also as an inner skill internalized within the model's parameters that drives the orchestrator to solve complex tasks. We identify this skill as a two-stage pipeline, i.e., parallel reasoning then summarization, which can operate beneath any agentic harness. We present a systematic empirical study of HeavySkill across diverse domains. Our results show that this inner skill consistently outperforms traditional Best-of-N (BoN) strategies; notably, stronger LLMs can even approach Pass@N performance. Crucially, we demonstrate that the depth and width of heavy thinking, as a learnable skill, can be further scaled via reinforcement learning, offering a promising path toward self-evolving LLMs that internalize complex reasoning without relying on brittle orchestration layers.

Specification gaming is a critical failure mode of LLM agents. Despite this, there has been little systematic research into when it arises and what drives it. To address this, we build and open source a diverse suite of tasks where models can score highly by taking unintended actions. We find that all tested models exploit their specifications at non-negligible rates in most of our eight settings, including five non-coding settings. We see the highest rates of specification gaming in Grok 4 and the lowest rates in Claude models. We use our evaluation suite to study what drives specification gaming, and find that: 1. RL reasoning training substantially increases the rate at which models exploit their specifications, 2. Increasing RL reasoning budget has a weakly positive effect on exploit rate, and 3. Test-time mitigations reduce but do not eliminate the rate of specification gaming. Our results suggest that specification gaming is a fundamental challenge arising from RL reasoning training; we release our evaluation suite to support further work on this problem.

Sixth-generation (6G) networks are increasingly envisioned as AI-native infrastructures integrating communication, sensing, and computing into a unified fabric. However, existing approaches remain largely optimization-centric, relying on closed-loop control with limited reasoning capability. In this paper, we argue for a paradigm shift toward Agentic AI-Native 6G, in which Large Language Model (LLM)-based agents operate as bounded, policy-governed reasoning entities within a semantic control plane layered above deterministic 3GPP infrastructure. We propose a four-layer architecture that integrates deterministic network infrastructure, semantic abstraction of intent and context, hierarchical reasoning, and a distributed multi-agent fabric spanning device, edge, and core domains. To assess feasibility, we develop a proof-of-concept agentic reasoning and orchestration framework and conduct an extensive empirical study using a domain-specific 6G benchmark under realistic deployment constraints. Our results reveal a fundamental tradeoff between reasoning capability and system efficiency, showing that no single model simultaneously satisfies latency, throughput, and accuracy requirements. Instead, heterogeneous deployment of LLM agents across the device--edge--core continuum is necessary to balance these constraints. We further demonstrate that quantization introduces non-uniform effects across models, reinforcing the need for system-level optimization rather than model-level compression alone. These findings establish agentic intelligence as a viable architectural direction for 6G and highlight key challenges in achieving scalable, trustworthy, and self-reasoning networks. All experimental results and evaluation scripts are publicly available to support reproducibility.

Process Reward Models (PRMs) have achieved remarkable success in augmenting the reasoning capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) within static domains such as mathematics. However, their potential in dynamic data analysis tasks remains underexplored. In this work, we first present a empirical study revealing that general-domain PRMs struggle to supervise data analysis agents. Specifically, they fail to detect silent errors, logical flaws that yield incorrect results without triggering interpreter exceptions, and erroneously penalize exploratory actions, mistaking necessary trial-and-error exploration for grounding failures. To bridge this gap, we introduce DataPRM, a novel environment-aware generative process reward model that (1) can serve as an active verifier, autonomously interacting with the environment to probe intermediate execution states and uncover silent errors, and (2) employs a reflection-aware ternary reward strategy that distinguishes between correctable grounding errors and irrecoverable mistakes. We design a scalable pipeline to construct over 8K high-quality training instances for DataPRM via diversity-driven trajectory generation and knowledge-augmented step-level annotation. Experimental results demonstrate that DataPRM improves downstream policy LLMs by 7.21% on ScienceAgentBench and 11.28% on DABStep using Best-of-N inference. Notably, with only 4B parameters, DataPRM outperforms strong baselines, and exhibits robust generalizability across diverse Test-Time Scaling strategies. Furthermore, integrating DataPRM into Reinforcement Learning yields substantial gains over outcome-reward baselines, achieving 78.73% on DABench and 64.84% on TableBench, validating the effectiveness of process reward supervision. Code is available at https://github.com/zjunlp/DataMind.

Large language model (LLM) agents are increasingly tasked with complex real-world analysis (e.g., in financial forecasting, scientific discovery), yet their reasoning suffers from stochastic instability and lacks a verifiable, compositional structure. To address this, we introduce Analytica, a novel agent architecture built on the principle of Soft Propositional Reasoning (SPR). SPR reframes complex analysis as a structured process of estimating the soft truth values of different outcome propositions, allowing us to formally model and minimize the estimation error in terms of its bias and variance. Analytica operationalizes this through a parallel, divide-and-conquer framework that systematically reduces both sources of error. To reduce bias, problems are first decomposed into a tree of subpropositions, and tool-equipped LLM grounder agents are employed, including a novel Jupyter Notebook agent for data-driven analysis, that help to validate and score facts. To reduce variance, Analytica recursively synthesizes these grounded leaves using robust linear models that average out stochastic noise with superior efficiency, scalability, and enable interactive "what-if" scenario analysis. Our theoretical and empirical results on economic, financial, and political forecasting tasks show that Analytica improves 15.84% accuracy on average over diverse base models, achieving 71.06% accuracy with the lowest variance of 6.02% when working with a Deep Research grounder. Our Jupyter Notebook grounder shows strong cost-effectiveness that achieves a close 70.11% accuracy with 90.35% less cost and 52.85% less time. Analytica also exhibits highly noise-resilient and stable performance growth as the analysis depth increases, with a near-linear time complexity, as well as good adaptivity to open-weight LLMs and scientific domains.

Causal discovery through experimentation and intervention is fundamental to robust problem solving. It requires not just updating beliefs within a fixed framework but revising the hypothesis space itself, a capacity current AI agents lack when evidence demands representations they have not previously constructed. We extend the blicket detector paradigm from developmental science to test this capacity in AI agents equipped with architectural scaffolding that targets hypothesis-space restructuring. Our compositional architecture has two discrete components: context graphs, which structure exploration as typed state machines, and dynamic behaviors, which monitor for evidence that the current hypothesis space is inadequate and expand it at runtime. Across 1,085 experimental trials, these components make orthogonal contributions: context graphs drive reasoning quality within the post-switch hypothesis space, accounting for 94% of the accuracy gain, while dynamic behaviors drive reasoning eligibility by detecting regime changes and preventing premature commitment to outdated hypotheses.

Human mobility prediction is a critical task but remains challenging due to its complexity and variability across populations and regions. Recently, large language models (LLMs) have made progress in zero-shot prediction, but existing methods suffer from limited interpretability (due to black-box reasoning), lack of iterative learning from new data, and poor transferability. In this paper, we introduce \textbf{ARMove}, a fully transferable framework for predicting human mobility through agentic reasoning. To address these limitations, ARMove employs standardized feature management with iterative optimization and user-specific customization: four major feature pools for foundational knowledge, user profiles for segmentation, and an automated generation mechanism integrating LLM knowledge. Robust generalization is achieved via agentic decision-making that adjusts feature weights to maximize accuracy while providing interpretable decision paths. Finally, large-small model synergy distills strategies from large LLMs (e.g., 72B) to smaller ones (e.g., 7B), reducing costs and enhancing performance ceilings. Extensive experiments on four global datasets show ARMove outperforms state-of-the-art baselines on 6 out of 12 metrics (gains of 0.78% to 10.47%), with transferability tests confirming robustness across regions, users, and scales. The other 4 items also achieved suboptimal results. Transferability tests confirm its 19 robustness across regions, user groups, and model scales, while interpretability 20 analysis highlights its transparency in decision-making. Our codes are available at: https://anonymous.4open.science/r/ARMove-F847.

Agentic AI systems are rapidly advancing toward real-world applications, yet their readiness in complex and personalized environments remains insufficiently characterized. To address this gap, we introduce PersonalHomeBench, a benchmark for evaluating foundation models as agentic assistants in personalized smart home environments. The benchmark is constructed through an iterative process that progressively builds rich household states, which are then used to generate personalized, context-dependent tasks. To support realistic agent-environment interaction, we provide PersonalHomeTools, a comprehensive toolbox enabling household information retrieval, appliance control, and situational understanding. PersonalHomeBench evaluates both reactive and proactive agentic abilities under unimodal and multimodal observations. Thorough experimentation reveals a systematic performance reduction as task complexity increases, with pronounced failures in counterfactual reasoning and under partial observability, where effective tool-based information gathering is required. These results position PersonalHomeBench as a rigorous evaluation platform for analyzing the robustness and limitations of personalized agentic reasoning and planning.

Verifiers have been demonstrated to enhance LLM reasoning via test-time scaling (TTS). Yet, they face significant challenges in complex domains. Error propagation from incorrect intermediate reasoning can lead to false positives for seemingly plausible solutions, while lacking external grounding makes verifiers unreliable on computation or knowledge-intensive tasks. To address these challenges, we propose Agentic Verifier, a framework that transforms reward modeling into a multi-turn, tool-augmented deliberative process. We introduce complementary forward and backward agents: one traces solutions from premises to conclusions, while the other re-checks conclusions against their underlying premises. This bidirectional process enables a comprehensive, reliable, and interpretable assessment of solutions. To facilitate practical deployment, we propose AgentV-RL. Through proactive exploration and reinforcement learning, the verifier autonomously interleaves tool-use with internal reasoning. Extensive experiments show that Agentic Verifier yields consistent performance gains under both parallel and sequential TTS. Notably, our 4B variant surpasses state-of-the-art ORMs by 25.2%, positioning it as a promising paradigm for agentic reward modeling.

Information Extraction aims to distill structured, decision-relevant information from unstructured text, serving as a foundation for downstream understanding and reasoning. However, it is traditionally treated merely as a terminal objective: once extracted, the resulting structure is often consumed in isolation rather than maintained and reused during multi-step inference. Moving beyond this, we propose \textit{IE-as-Cache}, a framework that repurposes IE as a cognitive cache to enhance agentic reasoning. Drawing inspiration from hierarchical computer memory, our approach combines query-driven extraction with cache-aware reasoning to dynamically maintain compact intermediate information and filter noise. Experiments on challenging benchmarks across diverse LLMs demonstrate significant improvements in reasoning accuracy, indicating that IE can be effectively repurposed as a reusable cognitive resource and offering a promising direction for future research on downstream uses of IE.

Indoor 3D scenes are ultimately meant to be used: an embodied agent should be able to navigate, reach objects, and complete diverse activities. Yet whether a given scene actually supports these activities for a specific agent profile is rarely verified. Existing evaluations of indoor 3D scenes typically focus on visual quality and semantic plausibility. In contrast, the feasibility of an activity depends on geometric, agent-specific constraints such as reach, clearance, and navigable space availability. These properties are not captured by visual plausibility metrics, and, as we show, VLMs, which are increasingly used to reason about 3D scenes, often fail to determine action feasibility in a single shot. We present SceneTeract, a verification interface that separates semantic action understanding from physical feasibility. Given a scene, an activity, and an embodied agent profile, we decompose the activity into atomic actions on scene objects. Explicit geometric checks then decide whether each step is executable and return a diagnostic trace explaining failures. In synthetic indoor scenes, SceneTeract reveals widespread functional and accessibility failures across diverse agent profiles. Moreover, when benchmarked against our verification, we find that existing VLMs systematically over-predict action feasibility, highlighting limited awareness of embodied functional constraints. In response, we post-train a lightweight VLM with verifier feedback, improving its assessment of physical feasibility. Although trained only on renders of synthetic scenes, we demonstrate that scene understanding improvements also generalize to real-world scenes. We will release our verification suite, benchmark labels, and diagnostic trace datasets.

With the rapid advancement of agent-based methods in recent years, Agentic RAG has undoubtedly become an important research direction. Multi-hop reasoning, which requires models to engage in deliberate thinking and multi-step interaction, serves as a critical testbed for assessing such capabilities. However, existing benchmarks typically provide only final questions and answers, while lacking the intermediate hop-level questions that gradually connect atomic questions to the final multi-hop query. This limitation prevents researchers from analyzing at which step an agent fails and restricts more fine-grained evaluation of model capabilities. Moreover, most current benchmarks are manually constructed, which is both time-consuming and labor-intensive, while also limiting scalability and generalization. To address these challenges, we introduce AgenticRAGTracer, the first Agentic RAG benchmark that is primarily constructed automatically by large language models and designed to support step-by-step validation. Our benchmark spans multiple domains, contains 1,305 data points, and has no overlap with existing mainstream benchmarks. Extensive experiments demonstrate that even the best large language models perform poorly on our dataset. For instance, GPT-5 attains merely 22.6% EM accuracy on the hardest portion of our dataset. Hop-aware diagnosis reveals that failures are primarily driven by distorted reasoning chains -- either collapsing prematurely or wandering into over-extension. This highlights a critical inability to allocate steps consistent with the task's logical structure, providing a diagnostic dimension missing in traditional evaluations. We believe our work will facilitate research in Agentic RAG and inspire further meaningful progress in this area. Our code and data are available at https://github.com/YqjMartin/AgenticRAGTracer.

Knowledge representation formalisms are aimed to represent general conceptual information and are typically used in the construction of the knowledge base of reasoning agent. A knowledge base can be thought of as representing the beliefs of such an agent. Like a child, a strong-AI (AGI) robot would have to learn through input and experiences, constantly progressing and advancing its abilities over time. Both with statistical AI generated by neural networks we need also the concept of \textsl{causality} of events traduced into directionality of logic entailments and deductions in order to give to robots the emulation of human intelligence. Moreover, by using the axioms we can guarantee the \textsl{controlled security} about robot's actions based on logic inferences. For AGI robots we consider the 4-valued Belnap's bilattice of truth-values with knowledge ordering as well, where the value "unknown" is the bottom value, the sentences with this value are indeed unknown facts, that is, the missed knowledge in the AGI robots. Thus, these unknown facts are not part of the robot's knowledge database, and by learn through input and experiences, the robot's knowledge would be naturally expanded over time. Consequently, this phenomena can be represented by the Closed Knowledge Assumption and Logic Inference provided by this paper. Moreover, the truth-value "inconsistent", which is the top value in the knowledge ordering of Belnap's bilattice, is necessary for strong-AI robots to be able to support such inconsistent information and paradoxes, like Liar paradox, during deduction processes.

Real-time embodied social interaction places two equally demanding requirements on an agent: continuously generating fluent multimodal interaction behavior, and proactively reasoning over accumulated dialogue and visual context to decide when to take initiative. These requirements must both be satisfied under a strict latency budget, making them difficult to meet simultaneously. We present ProAct, a dual-system framework that manages these time-critical requirements by integrating a low-latency Behavioral System for streaming multimodal interaction with a slower Cognitive System that performs long-horizon social reasoning and produces high-level proactive intentions. The Cognitive System incorporates an efficient memory mechanism and a user-motivation prediction module to reason over accumulated dialogue and visual context and determine when proactive intervention is appropriate. The Behavioral System further includes an intention-conditioned streaming flow-matching motion generator with a disentangled ControlNet branch, which translates deliberative intentions into continuous non-verbal behavior without disrupting interaction fluency. We deploy ProAct on a physical humanoid robot and validate the framework through comprehensive experiments, including real-world user studies, motion-generation benchmarks, and evaluation on ProActBench, a new, targeted benchmark for evaluating proactive trigger detection and restraint in embodied interaction.