Despite the remarkable advances of Large Language Models (LLMs) across diverse cognitive tasks, the rapid enhancement of these capabilities also introduces emergent deception behaviors that may induce severe risks in high-stakes deployments. More critically, the characterization of deception across realistic real-world scenarios remains underexplored.

Advancing code reasoning in large language models (LLMs) is fundamentally limited by the scarcity of high-difficulty datasets, especially those with verifiable input-output test cases necessary for rigorous solution validation at scale. We introduce rStar-Coder, which significantly improves LLM code reasoning capabilities by constructing a large-scale, verified dataset of 418K competition-level code problems, 580K long-reasoning solutions along with rich test cases of varying difficulty. This is achieved through three core contributions: (1) we curate competitive programming code problems and solutions to synthesize new, solvable problems; (2) we introduce a reliable input-output test case synthesis pipeline that decouples the generation into a three-step input generation method and a mutual verification mechanism for effective output labeling; (3) we augment problems with high-quality, test-case-verified long-reasoning solutions. Extensive experiments on Qwen models (1.5B-14B) across various code reasoning benchmarks demonstrate the superiority of rStar-Coder dataset, achieving leading performance comparable to frontier reasoning LLMs with significantly smaller model sizes.

Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) enhances large language models (LLMs) by integrating external knowledge, yet traditional RAG systems struggle with static workflows and limited adaptability for complex, multistep reasoning tasks. Agentic RAG systems, such as DeepResearch, address these issues through dynamic retrieval, iterative context refinement, and adaptive workflows. However, recent methods like Search-R1, which rely on outcome-based reinforcement learning, face challenges such as low exploration efficiency, gradient conflict, and sparse reward signals. To tackle these limitations, we introduce ReasonRAG, a novel method that leverages RAG-ProGUIDE--a high-quality dataset providing fine-grained, process-level rewards for query generation, evidence extraction, and answer generation. By employing process-supervised reinforcement learning, ReasonRAG enhances LLMs' autonomous capabilities in search, query generation, evidence extraction, and answer synthesis. Experimental results show that ReasonRAG, utilizing RAG-ProGUIDE, outperforms existing approaches like Search-R1 and traditional RAG systems, achieving superior performance on five benchmark datasets with only 5k training instances--significantly fewer than the 90k required by Search-R1.

What does it truly mean for a language model to "reason" strategically, and can scaling up alone guarantee intelligent, context-aware decisions? Strategic decision-making requires adaptive reasoning, where agents anticipate and respond to others' actions under uncertainty. Yet, most evaluations of large language models (LLMs) for strategic decision-making often rely heavily on Nash Equilibrium (NE) benchmarks, overlook reasoning depth, and fail to reveal the mechanisms behind model behavior. To address this gap, we introduce a behavioral game-theoretic evaluation framework that disentangles intrinsic reasoning from contextual influence. Using this framework, we evaluate 22 state-of-the-art LLMs across diverse strategic scenarios. We find models like GPT-o3-mini, GPT-o1, and DeepSeek-R1 lead in reasoning depth. Through thinking chain analysis, we identify distinct reasoning styles--such as maximin or belief-based strategies--and show that longer reasoning chains do not consistently yield better decisions. Furthermore, embedding demographic personas reveals context-sensitive shifts: some models (e.g., GPT-4o, Claude-3-Opus) improve when assigned female identities, while others (e.g., Gemini 2.0) show diminished reasoning under minority sexuality personas. These findings underscore that technical sophistication alone is insufficient; alignment with ethical standards, human expectations, and situational nuance is essential for the responsible deployment of LLMs in interactive settings.

Reinforcement learning (RL) has shown great effectiveness for fine-tuning large language models (LLMs) using tasks that are challenging yet easily verifiable, such as math reasoning or code generation. However, extending this success to visual perception in vision-language models (VLMs) has been impeded by the scarcity of vision-centric tasks that are simultaneously challenging and unambiguously verifiable. To this end, we introduce \textbf{ViCrit} (\textit{Visual Caption Hallucination Critic}), an RL proxy task that trains VLMs to localize a subtle, synthetic visual hallucination injected into paragraphs of human-written image captions. Starting from a 200-word captions, we inject a single, subtle visual description error--altering a few words on objects, attributes, counts, or spatial relations--and task the model to pinpoint the corrupted span given the image and the modified caption. This formulation preserves the full perceptual difficulty while providing a binary, exact-match reward that is easy to compute and unambiguous. Models trained with the \textbf{ViCrit Task} exhibit substantial gains across a variety of VL benchmarks. Crucially, the improvements transfer beyond natural-image training data to abstract image reasoning and visual math, showing promises of learning to perceive rather than barely memorizing seen objects. To facilitate evaluation, we further introduce \textbf{ViCrit-Bench}, a category-balanced diagnostic benchmark that systematically probes perception errors across diverse image domains and error types. Together, our results demonstrate that fine-grained hallucination criticism is an effective and generalizable objective for enhancing visual perception in VLMs.

Large language models (LLMs) often produce reasoning steps that are superficially coherent yet internally inconsistent, leading to unreliable outputs. Since such failures typically arise from implicit or poorly-grounded knowledge, we introduce \emph{Grounded Reasoning in Dependency (GRiD)}, a novel dependency-aware reasoning framework that explicitly grounds reasoning steps in structured knowledge. GRiD represents reasoning as a graph consisting of interconnected knowledge extraction nodes and reasoning nodes, enforcing logical consistency through explicit dependencies. Each reasoning step is validated via a lightweight, step-wise verifier that ensures logical correctness relative to its premises. Extensive experiments across diverse reasoning benchmarks--including StrategyQA, CommonsenseQA, GPQA, and TruthfulQA--demonstrate that GRiD substantially improves reasoning accuracy, consistency, and faithfulness compared to recent state-of-the-art structured reasoning methods. Notably, GRiD enhances performance even when applied purely as a lightweight verification module at inference time, underscoring its generalizability and practical utility. Code is available at: https://github.com/cure-lab/GRiD.

By incorporating visual inputs, Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) extend LLMs to support visual reasoning. However, this integration also introduces new vulnerabilities, making MLLMs susceptible to multimodal jailbreak attacks and hindering their safe deployment. Existing defense methods, including Image-to-Text Translation, Safe Prompting, and Multimodal Safety Tuning, attempt to address this by aligning multimodal inputs with LLMs' built-in safeguards. Yet, they fall short in uncovering root causes of multimodal vulnerabilities, particularly how harmful multimodal tokens trigger jailbreak in MLLMs? Consequently, they remain vulnerable to text-driven multimodal attacks, often exhibiting overdefensive behaviors and imposing heavy training overhead.

Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) has recently demonstrated notable success in enhancing the reasoning performance of large language models (LLMs), particularly in mathematics and programming tasks. It is widely believed that, similar to how traditional RL helps agents to explore and learn new strategies, RLVR enables LLMs to continuously self-improve, thus acquiring novel reasoning abilities that exceed the capacity of the corresponding base models. In this study, we take a critical look at \textit{the current state of RLVR} by systematically probing the reasoning capability boundaries of RLVR-trained LLMs across diverse model families, RL algorithms, and math/coding/visual reasoning benchmarks, using pass@\textit{k} at large \textit{k} values as the evaluation metric. While RLVR improves sampling efficiency towards the correct path, we surprisingly find that current training does \emph{not} elicit fundamentally new reasoning patterns. We observe that while RLVR-trained models outperform their base models at smaller values of $k$ (\eg, $k$=1), base models achieve higher pass@$k$ score when $k$ is large. Moreover, we observe that the reasoning capability boundary of LLMs often narrows as RLVR training progresses.

In-context learning, the ability of large language models to perform tasks using only examples provided in the prompt, has recently been adapted for time series forecasting. This paradigm enables zero-shot prediction, where past values serve as context for forecasting future values, making powerful forecasting tools accessible to non-experts and increasing the performance when training data are scarce. Most existing zero-shot forecasting approaches rely on transformer architectures, which, despite their success in language, often fall short of expectations in time series forecasting, where recurrent models like LSTMs frequently have the edge. Conversely, while LSTMs are well-suited for time series modeling due to their state-tracking capabilities, they lack strong in-context learning abilities. We introduce that closes this gap by leveraging xLSTM, an enhanced LSTM with competitive in-context learning skills. Unlike transformers, state-space models, or parallelizable RNNs such as RWKV, TiRex retains state tracking, a critical property for long-horizon forecasting. To further facilitate its state-tracking ability, we propose a training-time masking strategy called CPM. TiRex sets a new state of the art in zero-shot time series forecasting on the Hugging Face benchmarks and, outperforming significantly larger models including (Prior Labs), (Amazon), (Google), and (Salesforce) across both short-and long-term forecasts.

Private large language model (LLM) inference based on cryptographic primitives offers a promising path towards privacy-preserving deep learning. However, existing frameworks only support dense LLMs like LLaMA-1 and struggle to scale to mixture-of-experts (MoE) architectures. The key challenge comes from securely evaluating the dynamic routing mechanism in MoE layers, which may reveal sensitive input information if not fully protected. In this paper, we propose CryptoMoE, the first framework that enables private, efficient, and accurate inference for MoE-based models. CryptoMoE balances expert loads to protect expert routing information and proposes novel protocols for secure expert dispatch and combine. CryptoMoE also develops a confidence-aware token selection strategy and a batch matrix multiplication protocol to improve accuracy and efficiency further.