Test collections are crucial for evaluating Information Retrieval (IR) systems. Creating a diverse set of user queries for these collections can be challenging, and obtaining relevance judgments, which indicate how well retrieved documents match a query, is often costly and resource-intensive. Recently, generating synthetic datasets using Large Language Models (LLMs) has gained attention in various applications. While previous work has used LLMs to generate synthetic queries or documents to improve ranking models, using LLMs to create synthetic test collections is still relatively unexplored. Previous work~\cite{rahmani2024synthetic} showed that synthetic test collections have the potential to be used for system evaluation, however, more analysis is needed to validate this claim. In this paper, we thoroughly investigate the reliability of synthetic test collections constructed using LLMs, where LLMs are used to generate synthetic queries, labels, or both. In particular, we examine the potential biases that might occur when such test collections are used for evaluation. We first empirically show the presence of such bias in evaluation results and analyse the effects it might have on system evaluation. We further validate the presence of such bias using a linear mixed-effects model. Our analysis shows that while the effect of bias present in evaluation results obtained using synthetic test collections could be significant, for e.g.~computing absolute system performance, its effect may not be as significant in comparing relative system performance. Codes and data are available at: https://github.com/rahmanidashti/BiasSyntheticData.

It is important for Large Language Models (LLMs) to be aware of the boundary of their knowledge, distinguishing queries they can confidently answer from those that lie beyond their capabilities. Such awareness enables models to perform adaptive inference, such as invoking retrieval-augmented generation (RAG), engaging in slow and deep thinking, or abstaining from answering when appropriate. These mechanisms are key to developing efficient and trustworthy AI. In this work, we propose a method to detect knowledge boundaries via Query-Level Uncertainty, which estimates if a model is capable of answering a given query before generating any tokens, thus avoiding the generation cost. To this end, we propose a novel, training-free method called Internal Confidence, which leverages self-evaluations across layers and tokens to provide a reliable signal of uncertainty. Empirical studies on both factual question answering and mathematical reasoning tasks demonstrate that our Internal Confidence outperforms several baselines in quality of confidence while being computationally cheaper. Furthermore, we demonstrate its benefits in adaptive inference settings, showing that for RAG and model cascading it reduces inference costs while preserving overall performance.

Recent advances in large language model (LLM) reasoning have shown that sophisticated behaviors such as planning and self-reflection can emerge through reinforcement learning (RL). However, despite these successes, RL in its current form remains insufficient to induce capabilities that exceed the limitations of the base model, as it is primarily optimized based on existing knowledge of the model rather than facilitating the acquisition of new information. To address this limitation, we employ supervised fine-tuning (SFT) to learn what RL cannot, which enables the incorporation of new knowledge and reasoning patterns by leveraging high-quality demonstration data. We analyze the training dynamics of RL and SFT for LLM reasoning and find that RL excels at maintaining and improving performance on questions within the model's original capabilities, while SFT is more effective at enabling progress on questions beyond the current scope of the model. Motivated by the complementary strengths of RL and SFT, we introduce a novel training approach, \textbf{ReLIFT} (\textbf{Re}inforcement \textbf{L}earning \textbf{I}nterleaved with Online \textbf{F}ine-\textbf{T}uning). In ReLIFT, the model is primarily trained using RL, but when it encounters challenging questions, high-quality solutions are collected for fine-tuning, and the training process alternates between RL and fine-tuning to enhance the model's reasoning abilities. ReLIFT achieves an average improvement of over +5.2 points across five competition-level benchmarks and one out-of-distribution benchmark compared to other zero-RL models. Furthermore, we demonstrate that ReLIFT outperforms both RL and SFT while using only 13\% of the detailed demonstration data, highlighting its scalability. These results provide compelling evidence that ReLIFT overcomes the fundamental limitations of RL and underscores the significant potential.

Conventional preference learning methods often prioritize opinions held more widely when aggregating preferences from multiple evaluators. This may result in policies that are biased in favor of some types of opinions or groups and susceptible to strategic manipulation. To address this issue, we develop a novel preference learning framework capable of aligning aggregate opinions and policies proportionally with the true population distribution of evaluator preferences. Grounded in social choice theory, our approach infers the feasible set of evaluator population distributions directly from pairwise comparison data. Using these estimates, the algorithm constructs a policy that satisfies foundational axioms from social choice theory, namely monotonicity and Pareto efficiency, as well as our newly-introduced axioms of population-proportional alignment and population-bounded manipulability. Moreover, we propose a soft-max relaxation method that smoothly trade-offs population-proportional alignment with the selection of the Condorcet winner (which beats all other options in pairwise comparisons). Finally, we validate the effectiveness and scalability of our approach through experiments on both tabular recommendation tasks and large language model alignment.

Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) systems commonly suffer from Knowledge Conflicts, where retrieved external knowledge contradicts the inherent, parametric knowledge of large language models (LLMs). It adversely affects performance on downstream tasks such as question answering (QA). Existing approaches often attempt to mitigate conflicts by directly comparing two knowledge sources in a side-by-side manner, but this can overwhelm LLMs with extraneous or lengthy contexts, ultimately hindering their ability to identify and mitigate inconsistencies. To address this issue, we propose Micro-Act a framework with a hierarchical action space that automatically perceives context complexity and adaptively decomposes each knowledge source into a sequence of fine-grained comparisons. These comparisons are represented as actionable steps, enabling reasoning beyond the superficial context. Through extensive experiments on five benchmark datasets, Micro-Act consistently achieves significant increase in QA accuracy over state-of-the-art baselines across all 5 datasets and 3 conflict types, especially in temporal and semantic types where all baselines fail significantly. More importantly, Micro-Act exhibits robust performance on non-conflict questions simultaneously, highlighting its practical value in real-world RAG applications.

We introduce MedAgentGym, a scalable and interactive training environment designed to enhance coding-based biomedical reasoning capabilities in large language model (LLM) agents. MedAgentGym comprises 72,413 task instances across 129 categories derived from 12 authentic real-world biomedical scenarios. Tasks are encapsulated within executable sandbox environments, each featuring detailed task specifications, interactive feedback mechanisms, verifiable ground truth annotations, and scalable training trajectory generation. Extensive benchmarking of 29 LLMs reveals substantial performance disparities in biomedical data science between commercial and open-source LLMs. Leveraging efficient multi-threaded and multi-turn trajectory sampling in MedAgentGym, Med-Copilot achieves performance gains of +43.02% and +45.28% from offline and online reinforcement learning, respectively, demonstrating MedAgentGym as an effective training ground while establishing itself as a cost-effective, privacy-preserving alternative competitive with proprietary LLMs (gpt-4o). By offering a unified execution environment with a comprehensive benchmark and accessible, extensible training resources, MedAgentGym delivers an integrated platform to develop LLM-based coding assistants for advanced biomedical data science.

Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) have shown promising capabilities in reasoning tasks, yet still struggle with complex problems requiring explicit self-reflection and self-correction, especially compared to their unimodal text-based counterparts. Existing reflection methods are simplistic and struggle to generate meaningful and instructive feedback, as the reasoning ability and knowledge limits of pre-trained models are largely fixed during initial training. To overcome these challenges, we propose Multimodal Self-Reflection enhanced reasoning with Group Relative Policy Optimization (SRPO), a two-stage reflection-aware reinforcement learning (RL) framework explicitly designed to enhance multimodal LLM reasoning. In the first stage, we construct a high-quality, reflection-focused dataset under the guidance of an advanced MLLM, which generates reflections based on initial responses to help the policy model learn both reasoning and self-reflection. In the second stage, we introduce a novel reward mechanism within the GRPO framework that encourages concise and cognitively meaningful reflection while avoiding redundancy. Extensive experiments across multiple multimodal reasoning benchmarks, including MathVista, MathVision, MathVerse, and MMMU-Pro, using Qwen-2.5-VL-7B and Qwen-2.5-VL-32B demonstrate that SRPO significantly outperforms state-of-the-art models, achieving notable improvements in both reasoning accuracy and reflection quality.

The rapid development of Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLM) has led to a wide range of MLLM applications, and a number of benchmark datasets have sprung up in order to assess MLLM abilities. However, full-coverage Q&A testing on large-scale data is resource-intensive and time-consuming. To address this issue, we propose the MLLM Interview (MITV) strategy, which aims to quickly obtain MLLM performance metrics by quizzing fewer question. First, First, we constructed the interview dataset, which was built on an existing MLLM assessment dataset, by adding difficulty labels based on the performance of some typical MLLMs in this dataset. Second, we propose an MLLM Interview strategy, which obtains an initial performance situation of the large model by quizzing a small number of topics and then continuously tries to test the model's limits. Through extensive experiments, the result shows that the MITV strategy proposed in this paper performs well on MLLM benchmark datasets, and it is able to obtain the model evaluation capability faster through a small number of questions and answers.

Functional correctness is critical for ensuring the reliability and security of network protocol implementations. Functional bugs, instances where implementations diverge from behaviors specified in RFC documents, can lead to severe consequences, including faulty routing, authentication bypasses, and service disruptions. Detecting these bugs requires deep semantic analysis across specification documents and source code, a task beyond the capabilities of traditional static analysis tools. This paper introduces RFCAudit, an autonomous agent that leverages large language models (LLMs) to detect functional bugs by checking conformance between network protocol implementations and their RFC specifications. Inspired by the human auditing procedure, RFCAudit comprises two key components: an indexing agent and a detection agent. The former hierarchically summarizes protocol code semantics, generating semantic indexes that enable the detection agent to narrow down the scanning scope. The latter employs demand-driven retrieval to iteratively collect additional relevant data structures and functions, eventually identifying potential inconsistencies with the RFC specifications effectively. We evaluate RFCAudit across six real-world network protocol implementations. RFCAudit identifies 47 functional bugs with 81.9% precision, of which 20 bugs have been confirmed or fixed by developers.

The choice of a suitable visual language projector (VLP) is critical to the successful training of large visual language models (LVLMs). Mainstream VLPs can be broadly categorized into compressed and uncompressed projectors, and each offers distinct advantages in performance and computational efficiency. However, their security implications have not been thoroughly examined. Our comprehensive evaluation reveals significant differences in their security profiles: compressed projectors exhibit substantial vulnerabilities, allowing adversaries to successfully compromise LVLMs even with minimal knowledge of structure information. In stark contrast, uncompressed projectors demonstrate robust security properties and do not introduce additional vulnerabilities. These findings provide critical guidance for researchers in selecting optimal VLPs that enhance the security and reliability of visual language models. The code is available at https://github.com/btzyd/TCP.