Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning has advanced the capabilities and transparency of language models (LMs); however, reasoning chains can contain inaccurate statements that reduce performance and trustworthiness. To address this, we propose to augment each reasoning step in a CoT with a latent veracity (or correctness) variable. To efficiently explore this expanded space, we introduce Veracity Search (VS), a discrete search algorithm over veracity assignments. It performs otherwise intractable inference in the posterior distribution over latent veracity values by leveraging the LM's joint likelihood over veracity and the final answer as a proxy reward. This efficient inference-time verification method facilitates supervised fine-tuning of an Amortized Veracity Inference (AVI) machine by providing pseudo-labels for veracity. AVI generalizes VS, enabling accurate zero-shot veracity inference in novel contexts. Empirical results demonstrate that VS reliably identifies errors in logical (ProntoQA), mathematical (GSM8K), and commonsense (CommonsenseQA) reasoning benchmarks, with AVI achieving comparable zero-shot accuracy. Finally, we demonstrate the utility of latent veracity inference for providing feedback during self-correction and self-improvement.

Token-level attention tuning, a class of training-free methods including Post-hoc Attention Steering (PASTA) and Attention Calibration (ACT), has emerged as a promising way to improve frozen LLMs with interpretable interventions. However, these methods depend on auxiliary heuristics to identify "important" task-specific tokens, which can introduce bias and limit applicability when token importance is unclear or when using optimized kernels where attention maps are inaccessible. We propose a simpler and more elegant alternative: acting only on the initial token (e.g., in LLaMA). We show theoretically that adding lightweight biases to this token's attention logits monotonically controls the entropy of the downstream attention distribution - an effect amplified by its natural function as an attention sink. Our empirical analysis reveals that this tuning process can positively affect LLMs and better unlock their pretrained knowledge, with stronger effects in early layers and distinct scaling preferences across attention heads. Building on these insights, we introduce ZeroTuning: a training-free method that improves LLM performance by applying head-specific attention adjustments to the initial token, requiring zero parameter updates. We present two variants: a supervised mode that calibrates on validation examples, and a novel unsupervised mode that directly minimizes the model's output entropy. The method is lightweight, kernel-agnostic, and requires only four lines of modification to the standard LlamaAttention code. It achieves broad gains across 15 datasets and outperforms previous, more complex methods; for instance, with Llama-3.1-8B, it yields relative improvements of 19.9% on classification, 4.5% on question answering, and 2.1% on dialogue. ZeroTuning also works out-of-the-box with quantized inference and maintains its performance improvements with increasing context lengths.

While Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive capabilities, their output quality remains inconsistent across various application scenarios, making it difficult to identify trustworthy responses, especially in complex tasks requiring multi-step reasoning. In this paper, we propose a Token-level Uncertainty estimation framework for Reasoning (TokUR) that enables LLMs to self-assess and self-improve their responses in mathematical reasoning. Specifically, we introduce low-rank random weight perturbation during LLM decoding to generate predictive distributions for token-level uncertainty estimation, and we aggregate these uncertainty quantities to capture the semantic uncertainty of generated responses. Experiments on mathematical reasoning datasets of varying difficulty demonstrate that TokUR exhibits a strong correlation with answer correctness and model robustness, and the uncertainty signals produced by TokUR can be leveraged to enhance the model's reasoning performance at test time. These results highlight the effectiveness of TokUR as a principled and scalable approach for improving the reliability and interpretability of LLMs in challenging reasoning tasks.

Multi-agent systems built on large language models (LLMs) promise enhanced problem-solving through distributed information integration, but may also replicate collective reasoning failures observed in human groups. Yet the absence of a theory-grounded benchmark makes it difficult to systematically evaluate and improve such reasoning. We introduce HiddenBench, the first benchmark for evaluating collective reasoning in multi-agent LLMs. It builds on the Hidden Profile paradigm from social psychology, where individuals each hold asymmetric pieces of information and must communicate to reach the correct decision. To ground the benchmark, we formalize the paradigm with custom tasks and show that GPT-4.1 groups fail to integrate distributed knowledge, exhibiting human-like collective reasoning failures that persist even with varied prompting strategies. We then construct the full benchmark, spanning 65 tasks drawn from custom designs, prior human studies, and automatic generation. Evaluating 15 LLMs across four model families, HiddenBench exposes persistent limitations while also providing comparative insights: some models (e.g., Gemini-2.5-Flash/Pro) achieve higher performance, yet scale and reasoning are not reliable indicators of stronger collective reasoning. Our work delivers the first reproducible benchmark for collective reasoning in multi-agent LLMs, offering diagnostic insight and a foundation for future research on artificial collective intelligence.

Superoptimization is the task of transforming a program into a faster one while preserving its input-output behavior. In this work, we investigate whether large language models (LLMs) can serve as superoptimizers, generating assembly programs that outperform code already optimized by industry-standard compilers. We construct the first large-scale benchmark for this problem, consisting of 8,072 real-world assembly programs averaging 130 lines, in contrast to prior datasets restricted to 2-15 straight-line, loop-free programs. We evaluate 23 LLMs on this benchmark and find that the strongest baseline, Claude-opus-4, achieves a 51.5% test-passing rate and a 1.43x average speedup over gcc -O3. To further enhance performance, we fine-tune models with reinforcement learning, optimizing a reward function that integrates correctness and performance speedup. Starting from Qwen2.5-Coder-7B-Instruct (61.4% correctness, 1.10x speedup), the fine-tuned model SuperCoder attains 95.0% correctness and 1.46x average speedup. Our results demonstrate, for the first time, that LLMs can be applied as superoptimizers for assembly programs, establishing a foundation for future research in program performance optimization beyond compiler heuristics.

We introduce fs1, a simple yet effective method that improves the factuality of reasoning traces by sourcing them from large reasoning models (e.g., DeepSeek-R1) and grounding them by conditioning on knowledge graph (KG) paths. We fine-tune eight instruction-tuned Large Language Models (LLMs) on 3.9K factually grounded reasoning traces and rigorously evaluate them on six complex open-domain question-answering (QA) benchmarks encompassing 23.9K questions. Our results demonstrate that our fs1-tuned model (32B parameters) consistently outperforms instruction-tuned counterparts with parallel sampling by 6-14 absolute points (pass@$16$). Our detailed analysis shows that fs1 considerably improves model performance over more complex questions (requiring 3 or more hops on KG paths) and numerical answer types compared to the baselines. Furthermore, in single-pass inference, we notice that smaller LLMs show the most improvements. While prior works demonstrate the effectiveness of reasoning traces primarily in the STEM domains, our work shows strong evidence that anchoring reasoning to factual KG paths is a critical step in transforming LLMs for reliable knowledge-intensive tasks.

With the widespread adoption of Large Language Models (LLMs), there is a growing need to establish best practices for leveraging their capabilities beyond traditional natural language tasks. In this paper, a novel cross-domain knowledge transfer framework is proposed to enhance the performance of LLMs in time series forecasting -- a task of increasing relevance in fields such as energy systems, finance, and healthcare. The approach systematically infuses LLMs with structured temporal information to improve their forecasting accuracy. This study evaluates the proposed method on a real-world time series dataset and compares it to a naive baseline where the LLM receives no auxiliary information. Results show that knowledge-informed forecasting significantly outperforms the uninformed baseline in terms of predictive accuracy and generalization. These findings highlight the potential of knowledge transfer strategies to bridge the gap between LLMs and domain-specific forecasting tasks.

Solving non-convex resource allocation problems poses significant challenges in wireless communication systems, often beyond the capability of traditional optimization techniques. To address this issue, we propose LLM-OptiRA, the first framework that leverages large language models (LLMs) to automatically detect and transform non-convex components into solvable forms, enabling fully automated resolution of non-convex resource allocation problems in wireless communication systems. LLM-OptiRA not only simplifies problem-solving by reducing reliance on expert knowledge, but also integrates error correction and feasibility validation mechanisms to ensure robustness. Experimental results show that LLM-OptiRA achieves an execution rate of 96% and a success rate of 80% on GPT-4, significantly outperforming baseline approaches in complex optimization tasks across diverse scenarios.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have been transformative across many domains. However, hallucination -- confidently outputting incorrect information -- remains one of the leading challenges for LLMs. This raises the question of how to accurately assess and quantify the uncertainty of LLMs. Extensive literature on traditional models has explored Uncertainty Quantification (UQ) to measure uncertainty and employed calibration techniques to address the misalignment between uncertainty and accuracy. While some of these methods have been adapted for LLMs, the literature lacks an in-depth analysis of their effectiveness and does not offer a comprehensive benchmark to enable insightful comparison among existing solutions. In this work, we fill this gap via a systematic survey of representative prior works on UQ and calibration for LLMs and introduce a rigorous benchmark. Using two widely used reliability datasets, we empirically evaluate six related methods, which justify the significant findings of our review. Finally, we provide outlooks for key future directions and outline open challenges. To the best of our knowledge, this survey is the first dedicated study to review the calibration methods and relevant metrics for LLMs.

Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable capabilities in code generation tasks. However, a gap remains between their output and the problem-solving strategies of human developers. Unlike humans, who spend substantial time disambiguating requirements through iterative dialogue, LLMs often generate code despite ambiguities in natural language requirements, leading to unreliable solutions. Different from prior work, we study whether a Code LLM can be fine-tuned to learn clarification-seeking behavior. While recent work has focused on LLM-based agents for iterative code generation, we argue that the ability to recognize and query ambiguous requirements should be intrinsic to the models themselves, especially in agentic AI where models and humans collaborate. We present ClarifyCoder, a framework with synthetic data generation and instruction-tuning that fine-tunes an LLM to identify ambiguities and request clarification before code generation. Our approach has two components: (1) a data synthesis technique that augments programming datasets with scenarios requiring clarification to generate clarification-aware training data, and (2) a fine-tuning strategy that teaches models to prioritize seeking clarification over immediate code generation when faced with incomplete or ambiguous requirements. We also provide an empirical analysis of integrating ClarifyCoder with standard fine-tuning for joint optimization of clarification-awareness and coding ability. Experimental results show that ClarifyCoder achieves a 63% communication rate (40% absolute increase) and a 52% good question rate (30% absolute increase) on ambiguous tasks, significantly improving LLMs' communication capabilities while maintaining code generation performance.