Humanoid loco-manipulation, which integrates whole-body locomotion with dexterous manipulation, remains a fundamental challenge in robotics. Beyond whole-body coordination and balance, a central difficulty lies in understanding human instructions and translating them into coherent sequences of embodied actions. Recent advances in foundation models provide transferable multimodal representations and reasoning capabilities, yet existing efforts remain largely restricted to either locomotion or manipulation in isolation, with limited applicability to humanoid settings. In this paper, we propose Humanoid-COA, the first humanoid agent framework that integrates foundation model reasoning with an Embodied Chain-of-Action (CoA) mechanism for zero-shot loco-manipulation. Within the perception--reasoning--action paradigm, our key contribution lies in the reasoning stage, where the proposed CoA mechanism decomposes high-level human instructions into structured sequences of locomotion and manipulation primitives through affordance analysis, spatial inference, and whole-body action reasoning. Extensive experiments on two humanoid robots, Unitree H1-2 and G1, in both an open test area and an apartment environment, demonstrate that our framework substantially outperforms prior baselines across manipulation, locomotion, and loco-manipulation tasks, achieving robust generalization to long-horizon and unstructured scenarios. Project page: https://humanoid-coa.github.io/

As programmers write code, they often edit and retry multiple times, creating rich "interaction traces" that reveal how they approach coding tasks and provide clues about their level of skill development. For novice programmers in particular, these traces reflect the diverse reasoning processes they employ to code, such as exploratory behavior to understand how a programming concept works, re-strategizing in response to bugs, and personalizing stylistic choices. In this work, we explore what can be learned from training language models on such reasoning traces: not just about code, but about coders, and particularly students learning to program. We introduce a dataset of over 3.8 million programming reasoning traces from users of Pencil Code, a free online educational platform used by students to learn simple programming concepts. Compared to models trained only on final programs or synthetically-generated traces, we find that models trained on real traces are stronger at modeling diverse student behavior. Through both behavioral and probing analyses, we also find that many properties of code traces, such as goal backtracking or number of comments, can be predicted from learned representations of the students who write them. Building on this result, we show that we can help students recover from mistakes by steering code generation models to identify a sequence of edits that will results in more correct code while remaining close to the original student's style. Together, our results suggest that many properties of code are properties of individual students and that training on edit traces can lead to models that are more steerable, more predictive of student behavior while programming, and better at generating programs in their final states. Code and data is available at https://github.com/meghabyte/pencilcode-public

Recent Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) excel at complex reasoning tasks but often suffer from overthinking, generating overly long and redundant reasoning trajectories. To explore its essence, our empirical analysis reveals that LRMs are primarily limited to recognizing task properties (i.e., difficulty levels) like humans before solving the problem, leading to a one-size-fits-all reasoning process. Inspired by this, a pressing and natural question emerges: Can we explicitly bootstrap such ability to alleviate overthinking in LRMs? In this paper, we propose Think-How-to-Think (TH2T), a novel two-stage fine-tuning strategy that progressively inspires LRMs' difficulty cognition and redundancy cognition of LRMs. Specifically, we first inject difficulty hypnosis into output prefixes to guide the model toward adaptive reasoning depth, trained on a hybrid dataset mixing short and long reasoning paths. Then, we incorporate redundancy hypnosis, which supervises the intermediate reasoning steps to identify and eliminate unnecessary reasoning patterns. Experiments on 7B/14B/32B models demonstrate that TH2T significantly reduces inference costs by over 70% on easy tasks and 40% on hard tasks while maintaining performance stability. The resulting outputs exhibit clear signs of difficulty-aware capabilities and reduced redundancy (e.g., reflection and looping).

Vision-Language Model (VLM) driving agents promise explainable end-to-end autonomy by first producing natural-language reasoning and then predicting trajectory planning. However, whether planning is causally driven by this reasoning remains a critical but unverified assumption. To investigate this, we build Drive-Mind, a large-scale driving Visual Question Answering (VQA) corpus with plan-aligned Chain-of-Thought (CoT), automatically generated from nuPlan. Our data generation process converts sensors and annotations into structured inputs and, crucially, separates priors from to-be-reasoned signals, enabling clean information ablations. Using DriveMind, we train representative VLM agents with Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT) and Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO) and evaluate them with nuPlan's metrics. Our results, unfortunately, indicate a consistent causal disconnect in reasoning-planning: removing ego/navigation priors causes large drops in planning scores, whereas removing CoT produces only minor changes. Attention analysis further shows that planning primarily focuses on priors rather than the CoT. Based on this evidence, we propose the Reasoning-Planning Decoupling Hypothesis, positing that the training-yielded reasoning is an ancillary byproduct rather than a causal mediator. To enable efficient diagnosis, we also introduce a novel, training-free probe that measures an agent's reliance on priors by evaluating its planning robustness against minor input perturbations. In summary, we provide the community with a new dataset and a diagnostic tool to evaluate the causal fidelity of future models. End-to-end autonomous driving learns planning directly from sensor data and has attracted sustained attention in both academia and industry commaai (2025); Chen et al. (2024); Hu et al. (2023); Jiang et al. (2023). Recent studies explore Vision Language Model (VLM) driving agents that combine the reasoning capability of large language models (LLMs) with visual perception in order to approximate human driving Wen et al. (2024); Zhang et al. (2024a). Chain of Thought (CoT) Wei et al. (2022) has been shown to enhance reasoning in LLMs Feng et al. (2023), and it is increasingly adopted in VLM driving agents to make the sequence of perception, analysis, and decision explicit Sima et al. (2025); Tian et al. (2024); Wang et al. (2024). The intention is to strengthen planning while improving interpretability and controllability. In this paradigm, the model generates a response that first articulates a CoT for reasoning, followed by the final planning trajectory. Consequently, planning is taken for granted as causally driven through the preceding CoT reasoning.

Prior work has shown that a significant driver of performance in reasoning models is their ability to reason and self-correct. A distinctive marker in these reasoning traces is the token wait, which often signals reasoning behavior such as backtracking. Despite being such a complex behavior, little is understood of exactly why models do or do not decide to reason in this particular manner, which limits our understanding of what makes a reasoning model so effective. In this work, we address the question whether model's latents preceding wait tokens contain relevant information for modulating the subsequent reasoning process. We train crosscoders at multiple layers of DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Llama-8B and its base version, and introduce a latent attribution technique in the crosscoder setting. We locate a small set of features relevant for promoting/suppressing wait tokens' probabilities. Finally, through a targeted series of experiments analyzing max activating examples and causal interventions, we show that many of our identified features indeed are relevant for the reasoning process and give rise to different types of reasoning patterns such as restarting from the beginning, recalling prior knowledge, expressing uncertainty, and double-checking.

Reasoning capability is pivotal for Large Language Models (LLMs) to solve complex tasks, yet achieving reliable and scalable reasoning remains challenging. While Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting has become a mainstream approach, existing methods often suffer from uncontrolled generation, insufficient quality, and limited diversity in reasoning paths. Recent efforts leverage code to enhance CoT by grounding reasoning in executable steps, but such methods are typically constrained to predefined mathematical problems, hindering scalability and generalizability. In this work, we propose Caco (Code-Assisted Chain-of-ThOught), a novel framework that automates the synthesis of high-quality, verifiable, and diverse instruction-CoT reasoning data through code-driven augmentation. Unlike prior work, Caco first fine-tunes a code-based CoT generator on existing math and programming solutions in a unified code format, then scales the data generation to a large amount of diverse reasoning traces. Crucially, we introduce automated validation via code execution and rule-based filtering to ensure logical correctness and structural diversity, followed by reverse-engineering filtered outputs into natural language instructions and language CoTs to enrich task adaptability. This closed-loop process enables fully automated, scalable synthesis of reasoning data with guaranteed executability. Experiments on our created Caco-1.3M dataset demonstrate that Caco-trained models achieve strong competitive performance on mathematical reasoning benchmarks, outperforming existing strong baselines. Further analysis reveals that Caco's code-anchored verification and instruction diversity contribute to superior generalization across unseen tasks. Our work establishes a paradigm for building self-sustaining, trustworthy reasoning systems without human intervention.

The ongoing debate on whether reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) expands or shrinks the reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs) remains unresolved. Some studies contend that RLVR mainly improves sampling efficiency but at the expense of diversity and exploratory capacity, resulting in capability boundary shrinkage. In contrast, others demonstrate that prolonged training can lead to the emergence of novel reasoning strategies, suggesting capability boundary expansion. To reconcile these contradictory findings, we theoretically and empirically show that both perspectives are partially valid-each aligning with a separate phase in an inherent two-stage probability mass dynamic: (1) Exploitation stage: initially, the model primarily samples explored high-reward and low-reward tokens, while rarely selecting the potentially optimal token. Positive advantage estimates increase the probability of high-reward tokens and decrease those of low-reward tokens, yet the optimal token's probability remains largely unchanged during this stage. (2) Exploration stage: as training advances, the growth rate of previously acquired high-reward tokens slows as their probabilities approach saturation. When a potentially optimal token-now receiving positive advantage estimates-is occasionally sampled, its probability increases, while those of the originally high-reward tokens decrease. This dynamic suggests that over-exploitation during the exploitation stage may lead to capability boundary shrinkage, whereas prolonged training into the exploration stage can promote an expansion of the reasoning capability boundary. Building upon our insights, we revisit the potential of only using relative negative gradients for prolonging training, providing a theoretical and empirical foundation for the development of more advanced reasoning capabilities.

This study presents PsychoLexTherapy, a framework for simulating psychotherapeutic reasoning in Persian using small language models (SLMs). The framework tackles the challenge of developing culturally grounded, therapeutically coherent dialogue systems with structured memory for multi-turn interactions in underrepresented languages. To ensure privacy and feasibility, PsychoLexTherapy is optimized for on-device deployment, enabling use without external servers. Development followed a three-stage process: (i) assessing SLMs psychological knowledge with PsychoLexEval; (ii) designing and implementing the reasoning-oriented PsychoLexTherapy framework; and (iii) constructing two evaluation datasets-PsychoLexQuery (real Persian user questions) and PsychoLexDialogue (hybrid simulated sessions)-to benchmark against multiple baselines. Experiments compared simple prompting, multi-agent debate, and structured therapeutic reasoning paths. Results showed that deliberate model selection balanced accuracy, efficiency, and privacy. On PsychoLexQuery, PsychoLexTherapy outperformed all baselines in automatic LLM-as-a-judge evaluation and was ranked highest by human evaluators in a single-turn preference study. In multi-turn tests with PsychoLexDialogue, the long-term memory module proved essential: while naive history concatenation caused incoherence and information loss, the full framework achieved the highest ratings in empathy, coherence, cultural fit, and personalization. Overall, PsychoLexTherapy establishes a practical, privacy-preserving, and culturally aligned foundation for Persian psychotherapy simulation, contributing novel datasets, a reproducible evaluation pipeline, and empirical insights into structured memory for therapeutic reasoning.

Humans understand the world through the integration of multiple sensory modalities, enabling them to perceive, reason about, and imagine dynamic physical processes. Inspired by this capability, multimodal foundation models (MFMs) have emerged as powerful tools for multimodal understanding and generation. However, today's MFMs fall short of serving as effective world models. They lack the essential ability such as perform counterfactual reasoning, simulate dynamics, understand the spatiotemporal information, control generated visual outcomes, and perform multifaceted reasoning. We investigates what it takes to bridge the gap between multimodal foundation models and world models. We begin by improving the reasoning capabilities of MFMs through discriminative tasks and equipping MFMs with structured reasoning skills, such as causal inference, counterfactual thinking, and spatiotemporal reasoning, enabling them to go beyond surface correlations and understand deeper relationships within visual and textual data. Next, we explore generative capabilities of multimodal foundation models across both image and video modalities, introducing new frameworks for structured and controllable generation. Our approaches incorporate scene graphs, multimodal conditioning, and multimodal alignment strategies to guide the generation process, ensuring consistency with high-level semantics and fine-grained user intent. We further extend these techniques to controllable 4D generation, enabling interactive, editable, and morphable object synthesis over time and space.

Tree search has become as a representative framework for test-time reasoning with large language models (LLMs), exemplified by methods such as Tree-of-Thought and Monte Carlo Tree Search that explore multiple reasoning paths. However, it remains difficult to provide instant and reliable quantitative assessments of intermediate reasoning step quality, and extensive path exploration is computationally costly. To address this, we propose Mutual Information Tree Search (MITS), a novel framework that guides reasoning with information-theoretic principles. MITS introduces an effective scoring function based on pointwise mutual information (PMI), which enables step-wise evaluation of reasoning paths and search tree expansion via beam search without expensive look-ahead simulations, achieving superior reasoning performances while maintaining computational efficiency. The framework is complemented by an entropy-based dynamic sampling strategy that adaptively allocates computational resources to uncertain reasoning steps where exploration is most beneficial. For final prediction, MITS employs a weighted voting scheme that combines PMI scores with prediction consensus. Complex multi-step reasoning remains a fundamental challenge for Large Language Models (LLMs), particularly in tasks that require logical deduction, mathematical computation, or systematic problem-solving (Y ang et al., 2025a; Zhu et al., 2024; Yi et al., 2024). While Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting (Wei et al., 2022; Kojima et al., 2022) has emerged as a powerful technique to enhance reasoning by decomposing problems into intermediate steps, it typically generates a single reasoning path, which may lead to incorrect solutions due to error accumulation or the selection of suboptimal reasoning strategies. This limitation becomes particularly pronounced in complex reasoning tasks where multiple valid approaches exist, but only specific paths lead to correct answers.