As artificial intelligence (AI) advances in reasoning capabilities, most recently with the emergence of Large Reasoning Models (LRMs), understanding how children conceptualize AI's reasoning processes becomes critical for fostering AI literacy. While one of the "Five Big Ideas" in AI education highlights reasoning algorithms as central to AI decision-making, less is known about children's mental models in this area. Through a two-phase approach, consisting of a co-design session with 8 children followed by a field study with 106 children (grades 3-8), we identified three models of AI reasoning: Deductive, Inductive, and Inherent. Our findings reveal that younger children (grades 3-5) often attribute AI's reasoning to inherent intelligence, while older children (grades 6-8) recognize AI as a pattern recognizer. We highlight three tensions that surfaced in children's understanding of AI reasoning and conclude with implications for scaffolding AI curricula and designing explainable AI tools.

Recent studies have demonstrated the efficacy of using Reinforcement Learning (RL) in building reasoning models that articulate chains of thoughts prior to producing final answers. However, despite ongoing advances that aim at enabling reasoning for vision-language tasks, existing open-source visual reasoning models typically generate reasoning content with pure natural language, lacking explicit integration of visual information. This limits their ability to produce clearly articulated and visually grounded reasoning chains. To this end, we propose Grounded Reasoning with Images and Texts (GRIT), a novel method for training MLLMs to think with images. GRIT introduces a grounded reasoning paradigm, in which models generate reasoning chains that interleave natural language and explicit bounding box coordinates. These coordinates point to regions of the input image that the model consults during its reasoning process. Additionally, GRIT is equipped with a reinforcement learning approach, GRPO-GR, built upon the GRPO algorithm. GRPO-GR employs robust rewards focused on the final answer accuracy and format of the grounded reasoning output, which eliminates the need for data with reasoning chain annotations or explicit bounding box labels. As a result, GRIT achieves exceptional data efficiency, requiring as few as 20 image-question-answer triplets from existing datasets. Comprehensive evaluations demonstrate that GRIT effectively trains MLLMs to produce coherent and visually grounded reasoning chains, showing a successful unification of reasoning and grounding abilities.

Effective social intelligence simulation requires language agents to dynamically adjust reasoning depth, a capability notably absent in current studies. Existing methods either lack this kind of reasoning capability or enforce Long Chain-of-Thought reasoning uniformly across all scenarios, resulting in excessive token usage and inflexible social simulation. To address this, we propose an $\textbf{A}$daptive $\textbf{M}$ode $\textbf{L}$earning ($\textbf{AML}$) framework in this paper, aiming to improve the adaptive thinking ability of language agents in dynamic social interactions. To this end, we first identify hierarchical thinking modes ranging from intuitive response to deep deliberation based on the cognitive control theory. We then develop the $\textbf{A}$daptive $\textbf{M}$ode $\textbf{P}$olicy $\textbf{O}$ptimization ($\textbf{AMPO}$) algorithm to optimize the context-aware mode switching and reasoning. Our framework advances existing research in three key aspects: (1) Multi-granular thinking mode design, (2) Context-aware mode switching across social interaction, and (3) Token-efficient reasoning via depth-adaptive processing. Extensive experiments on social intelligence benchmarks verify that AML achieves 15.6% higher task performance than GPT-4o. Notably, our AMPO outperforms GRPO by 7.0% with 32.8% shorter reasoning chains, demonstrating the advantage of adaptive thinking mode selection and optimization mechanism in AMPO over GRPO's fixed-depth solution.

Federated Learning (FL) has emerged as a promising paradigm for collaborative model training while preserving data privacy across decentralized participants. As FL adoption grows, numerous techniques have been proposed to tackle its practical challenges. However, the lack of standardized evaluation across key dimensions hampers systematic progress and fair comparison of FL methods. In this work, we introduce ATR-Bench, a unified framework for analyzing federated learning through three foundational dimensions: Adaptation, Trust, and Reasoning. We provide an in-depth examination of the conceptual foundations, task formulations, and open research challenges associated with each theme. We have extensively benchmarked representative methods and datasets for adaptation to heterogeneous clients and trustworthiness in adversarial or unreliable environments. Due to the lack of reliable metrics and models for reasoning in FL, we only provide literature-driven insights for this dimension. ATR-Bench lays the groundwork for a systematic and holistic evaluation of federated learning with real-world relevance. We will make our complete codebase publicly accessible and a curated repository that continuously tracks new developments and research in the FL literature.

Abstraction and reasoning in program synthesis has seen significant progress through both inductive and transductive paradigms. Inductive approaches generate a program or latent function from input-output examples, which can then be applied to new inputs. Transductive approaches directly predict output values for given inputs, effectively serving as the function themselves. Current approaches combine inductive and transductive models via isolated ensembling, but they do not explicitly model the interaction between both paradigms. In this work, we introduce \acs{tiips}, a novel framework that unifies transductive and inductive strategies by explicitly modeling their interactions through a cooperative mechanism: an inductive model generates programs, while a transductive model constrains, guides, and refines the search to improve synthesis accuracy and generalization. We evaluate \acs{tiips} on two widely studied program synthesis domains: string and list manipulation. Our results show that \acs{tiips} solves more tasks and yields functions that more closely match optimal solutions in syntax and semantics, particularly in out-of-distribution settings, yielding state-of-the-art performance. We believe that explicitly modeling the synergy between inductive and transductive reasoning opens promising avenues for general-purpose program synthesis and broader applications.

Large reasoning models (LRMs) have achieved remarkable progress on complex tasks by generating extended chains of thought (CoT). However, their uncontrolled output lengths pose significant challenges for real-world deployment, where inference-time budgets on tokens, latency, or compute are strictly constrained. We propose Elastic Reasoning, a novel framework for scalable chain of thoughts that explicitly separates reasoning into two phases--thinking and solution--with independently allocated budgets. At test time, Elastic Reasoning prioritizes the completeness of solution segments, significantly improving reliability under tight resource constraints. To train models that are robust to truncated thinking, we introduce a lightweight budget-constrained rollout strategy, integrated into GRPO, which teaches the model to reason adaptively when the thinking process is cut short and generalizes effectively to unseen budget constraints without additional training. Empirical results on mathematical (AIME, MATH500) and programming (LiveCodeBench, Codeforces) benchmarks demonstrate that Elastic Reasoning performs robustly under strict budget constraints, while incurring significantly lower training cost than baseline methods. Remarkably, our approach also produces more concise and efficient reasoning even in unconstrained settings. Our code has been made available at https://github.com/SalesforceAIResearch/Elastic-Reasoning.

Recent advances in large language models have demonstrated that Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT) with Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning data distilled from large reasoning models (e.g., DeepSeek R1) can effectively transfer reasoning capabilities to non-reasoning models. However, models fine-tuned with this approach inherit the "overthinking" problem from teacher models, producing verbose and redundant reasoning chains during inference. To address this challenge, we propose Long-Short Chain-of-Thought Mixture Supervised Fine-Tuning (LS-Mixture SFT), which combines long CoT reasoning dataset with their short counterparts obtained through structure-preserved rewriting. Our experiments demonstrate that models trained using the LS-Mixture SFT method, compared to those trained with direct SFT, achieved an average accuracy improvement of 2.3% across various benchmarks while substantially reducing model response length by approximately 47.61%. This work offers an approach to endow non-reasoning models with reasoning capabilities through supervised fine-tuning while avoiding the inherent overthinking problems inherited from teacher models, thereby enabling efficient reasoning in the fine-tuned models.

Recently, long-thought reasoning models achieve strong performance on complex reasoning tasks, but often incur substantial inference overhead, making efficiency a critical concern. Our empirical analysis reveals that the benefit of using Long-CoT varies across problems: while some problems require elaborate reasoning, others show no improvement, or even degraded accuracy. This motivates adaptive reasoning strategies that tailor reasoning depth to the input. However, prior work primarily reduces redundancy within long reasoning paths, limiting exploration of more efficient strategies beyond the Long-CoT paradigm. To address this, we propose a novel two-stage framework for adaptive and efficient reasoning. First, we construct a hybrid reasoning model by merging long and short CoT models to enable diverse reasoning styles. Second, we apply bi-level preference training to guide the model to select suitable reasoning styles (group-level), and prefer concise and correct reasoning within each style group (instance-level). Experiments demonstrate that our method (Ada-R1) significantly reduces inference costs compared to other baseline approaches, while maintaining performance. Notably, on five mathematical datasets, the average length of reasoning is reduced by more than 50%, highlighting the potential of adaptive strategies to optimize reasoning efficiency in large language models. Our code is coming soon at https://github.com/StarDewXXX/AdaR1

The application of reinforcement learning (RL) to enhance the reasoning capabilities of Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) constitutes a rapidly advancing research area. While MLLMs extend Large Language Models (LLMs) to handle diverse modalities such as vision, audio, and video, enabling robust reasoning across multimodal inputs remains challenging. This paper provides a systematic review of recent advances in RL-based reasoning for MLLMs, covering key algorithmic designs, reward mechanism innovations, and practical applications. We highlight two main RL paradigms, value-model-free and value-model-based methods, and analyze how RL enhances reasoning abilities by optimizing reasoning trajectories and aligning multimodal information. Additionally, we provide an extensive overview of benchmark datasets, evaluation protocols, and current limitations, and propose future research directions to address challenges such as sparse rewards, inefficient cross-modal reasoning, and real-world deployment constraints. Our goal is to provide a comprehensive and structured guide to RL-based multimodal reasoning.

Human cognition typically involves thinking through abstract, fluid concepts rather than strictly using discrete linguistic tokens. Current reasoning models, however, are constrained to reasoning within the boundaries of human language, processing discrete token embeddings that represent fixed points in the semantic space. This discrete constraint restricts the expressive power and upper potential of such reasoning models, often causing incomplete exploration of reasoning paths, as standard Chain-of-Thought (CoT) methods rely on sampling one token per step. In this work, we introduce Soft Thinking, a training-free method that emulates human-like "soft" reasoning by generating soft, abstract concept tokens in a continuous concept space. These concept tokens are created by the probability-weighted mixture of token embeddings, which form the continuous concept space, enabling smooth transitions and richer representations that transcend traditional discrete boundaries. In essence, each generated concept token encapsulates multiple meanings from related discrete tokens, implicitly exploring various reasoning paths to converge effectively toward the correct answer. Empirical evaluations on diverse mathematical and coding benchmarks consistently demonstrate the effectiveness and efficiency of Soft Thinking, improving pass@1 accuracy by up to 2.48 points while simultaneously reducing token usage by up to 22.4% compared to standard CoT. Qualitative analysis further reveals that Soft Thinking outputs remain highly interpretable and readable, highlighting the potential of Soft Thinking to break the inherent bottleneck of discrete language-based reasoning. Code is available at https://github.com/eric-ai-lab/Soft-Thinking.