Visual Language Models (VLMs) achieve promising results in medical reasoning but struggle with hallucinations, vague descriptions, inconsistent logic and poor localization. To address this, we propose a agent framework named Medical Visual Reasoning Agent (\textbf{Med-VRAgent}). The approach is based on Visual Guidance and Self-Reward paradigms and Monte Carlo Tree Search (MCTS). By combining the Visual Guidance with tree search, Med-VRAgent improves the medical visual reasoning capabilities of VLMs. We use the trajectories collected by Med-VRAgent as feedback to further improve the performance by fine-tuning the VLMs with the proximal policy optimization (PPO) objective. Experiments on multiple medical VQA benchmarks demonstrate that our method outperforms existing approaches.

Reinforcement learning (RL) has emerged as an effective paradigm for enhancing model reasoning. However, existing RL methods like GRPO often rely on unstructured self-sampling to fit scalar rewards, often producing inefficient rollouts that fail to capture transferable problem-solving strategies. To address these limitations, we propose **TemplateRL**, a structured template-guided RL framework that augments policy optimization with explicit template guidance. Our approach first constructs a problem-solving template library via MCTS on a small seed set, then seamlessly integrates this high-level structured guidance into RL training. By guiding rollout generation to align with proven template structures, TemplateRL significantly improves high-quality trajectory hit rates while reducing ineffective exploration. This structure-guided design steers the policy toward validated strategic patterns, stabilizing training dynamics, and enhancing RL sampling efficiency. Notably, the explicit template library is interpretable, editable, and supports online updates-enabling continuous updates during both training and inference. Extensive experiments demonstrate that TemplateRL outperforms GRPO by 99% on AIME and 41% on AMC, with superior stability on weak models and remarkable cross-domain generalization, highlighting its potential for broader tasks.

Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) have achieved remarkable progress in multimodal perception and generation, yet their safety alignment remains a critical challenge.Existing defenses and vulnerable to multimodal jailbreaks, as visual inputs introduce new attack surfaces, reasoning chains lack safety supervision, and alignment often degrades under modality fusion.To overcome these limitation, we propose VisuoAlign, a framework for multi-modal safety alignment via prompt-guided tree search.VisuoAlign embeds safety constrains into the reasoning process through visual-textual interactive prompts, employs Monte Carlo Tree Search(MCTS) to systematically construct diverse safety-critical prompt trajectories, and introduces prompt-based scaling to ensure real-time risk detection and compliant responses.Extensive experiments demonstrate that VisuoAlign proactively exposes risks, enables comprehensive dataset generation, and significantly improves the robustness of LVLMs against complex cross-modal threats.

Developing machine learning models often involves the evaluation of numerous intermediate models. These intermediate models arise during feature engineering, model architecture search, and hyperparam-eter tuning. For instance, during hyperparameter optimization, one might explore various configurations of learning rates, regularization parameters, and network architectures, repeatedly evaluating the model's performance at different training budgets. These accuracy assessments are influenced by the chosen model architecture and parameters, and they change as we alter these factors. Given that these evaluations are often computationally expensive, it is crucial to develop a general framework for optimally allocating resources across the vast space of potential intermediate models.

Test-time scaling improves large language models (LLMs) on long-horizon reasoning tasks by allocating more compute at inference. LLM Inference via Tree Search (LITS) methods achieve strong performance but are highly inefficient, often running an order of magnitude slower than iterative approaches. We propose Chain-in-Tree (CiT), a plug-in framework that decides when to branch during search rather than expanding at every step. CiT introduces lightweight Branching Necessity (BN) evaluations: BN-DP (Direct Prompting), where an auxiliary LLM judges branching needs, and BN-SC (Self-Consistency), which clusters candidate actions to assess agreement. Integrated into Tree of Thoughts, ReST-MCTS, and RAP, BN-DP achieves 75-85% reductions in token generation, model calls, and runtime on GSM8K and Math500, with often negligible or no accuracy loss. BN-SC typically yields substantial savings (up to 80%) generally but shows instability in 1-4 out of 14 settings, caused by a small subset of examples that produce extremely long reasoning steps. We theoretically prove that BN-DP never increases policy invocations and release both modular LITS implementations and a lightweight CiT function applicable across all LITS variants. The full codebase is publicly available at https://github.com/xinzhel/chain_in_tree.

Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) achieve superior performance by extending the thought length. However, a lengthy thinking trajectory leads to reduced efficiency. Most of the existing methods are stuck in the assumption of overthinking and attempt to reason efficiently by compressing the Chain-of-Thought, but this often leads to performance degradation. To address this problem, we introduce A*-Thought, an efficient tree search-based unified framework designed to identify and isolate the most essential thoughts from the extensive reasoning chains produced by these models. It formulates the reasoning process of LRMs as a search tree, where each node represents a reasoning span in the giant reasoning space. By combining the A* search algorithm with a cost function specific to the reasoning path, it can efficiently compress the chain of thought and determine a reasoning path with high information density and low cost. In addition, we also propose a bidirectional importance estimation mechanism, which further refines this search process and enhances its efficiency beyond uniform sampling. Extensive experiments on several advanced math tasks show that A*-Thought effectively balances performance and efficiency over a huge search space. Specifically, A*-Thought can improve the performance of QwQ-32B by 2.39$\times$ with low-budget and reduce the length of the output token by nearly 50% with high-budget. The proposed method is also compatible with several other LRMs, demonstrating its generalization capability. The code can be accessed at: https://github.com/AI9Stars/AStar-Thought.

Autonomous agents rely on automated planning algorithms to achieve their objectives. Simulation-based planning offers a significant advantage over declarative models in modelling complex environments. However, relying solely on a planner that produces a single plan may not be practical, as the generated plans may not always satisfy the agent's preferences. To address this limitation, we introduce $\texttt{FBI}_\texttt{LTL}$, a diverse planner explicitly designed for simulation-based planning problems. $\texttt{FBI}_\texttt{LTL}$ utilises Linear Temporal Logic (LTL) to define semantic diversity criteria, enabling agents to specify what constitutes meaningfully different plans. By integrating these LTL-based diversity models directly into the search process, $\texttt{FBI}_\texttt{LTL}$ ensures the generation of semantically diverse plans, addressing a critical limitation of existing diverse planning approaches that may produce syntactically different but semantically identical solutions. Extensive evaluations on various benchmarks consistently demonstrate that $\texttt{FBI}_\texttt{LTL}$ generates more diverse plans compared to a baseline approach. This work establishes the feasibility of semantically-guided diverse planning in simulation-based environments, paving the way for innovative approaches in realistic, non-symbolic domains where traditional model-based approaches fail.

Higher-order interactions (HOIs) in complex systems, such as scientific collaborations, multi-protein complexes, and multi-user communications, are commonly modeled as hypergraphs, where each hyperedge (i.e., a subset of nodes) represents an HOI among the nodes. Given a hypergraph, hyperedge prediction aims to identify hyperedges that are either missing or likely to form in the future, and it has broad applications, including recommending interest-based social groups, predicting collaborations, and uncovering functional complexes in biological systems. However, the vast search space of hyperedge candidates (i.e., all possible subsets of nodes) poses a significant computational challenge, making naive exhaustive search infeasible. As a result, existing approaches rely on either heuristic sampling to obtain constrained candidate sets or ungrounded assumptions on hypergraph structure to select promising hyperedges. In this work, we propose HyperSearch, a search-based algorithm for hyperedge prediction that efficiently evaluates unconstrained candidate sets, by incorporating two key components: (1) an empirically grounded scoring function derived from observations in real-world hypergraphs and (2) an efficient search mechanism, where we derive and use an anti-monotonic upper bound of the original scoring function (which is not antimonotonic) to prune the search space. This pruning comes with theoretical guarantees, ensuring that discarded candidates are never better than the kept ones w.r.t. the original scoring function. In extensive experiments on 10 real-world hypergraphs across five domains, HyperSearch consistently outperforms state-of-the-art baselines, achieving higher accuracy in predicting new (i.e., not in the training set) hyperedges.

Artificial intelligence (AI) is reshaping scientific discovery, evolving from specialized computational tools into autonomous research partners. We position Agentic Science as a pivotal stage within the broader AI for Science paradigm, where AI systems progress from partial assistance to full scientific agency. Enabled by large language models (LLMs), multimodal systems, and integrated research platforms, agentic AI shows capabilities in hypothesis generation, experimental design, execution, analysis, and iterative refinement -- behaviors once regarded as uniquely human. This survey provides a domain-oriented review of autonomous scientific discovery across life sciences, chemistry, materials science, and physics. We unify three previously fragmented perspectives -- process-oriented, autonomy-oriented, and mechanism-oriented -- through a comprehensive framework that connects foundational capabilities, core processes, and domain-specific realizations. Building on this framework, we (i) trace the evolution of AI for Science, (ii) identify five core capabilities underpinning scientific agency, (iii) model discovery as a dynamic four-stage workflow, (iv) review applications across the above domains, and (v) synthesize key challenges and future opportunities. This work establishes a domain-oriented synthesis of autonomous scientific discovery and positions Agentic Science as a structured paradigm for advancing AI-driven research.

Test-Time Scaling (TTS) improves the performance of Large Language Models (LLMs) by using additional inference-time computation to explore multiple reasoning paths through search. Yet how to allocate a fixed rollout budget most effectively during search remains underexplored, often resulting in inefficient use of compute at test time. To bridge this gap, we formulate test-time search as a resource allocation problem and derive the optimal allocation strategy that maximizes the probability of obtaining a correct solution under a fixed rollout budget. Within this formulation, we reveal a core limitation of existing search methods: solution-level allocation tends to favor reasoning directions with more candidates, leading to theoretically suboptimal and inefficient use of compute. To address this, we propose Direction-Oriented Resource Allocation (DORA), a provably optimal method that mitigates this bias by decoupling direction quality from candidate count and allocating resources at the direction level. To demonstrate DORA's effectiveness, we conduct extensive experiments on challenging mathematical reasoning benchmarks including MATH500, AIME2024, and AIME2025. The empirical results show that DORA consistently outperforms strong baselines with comparable computational cost, achieving state-of-the-art accuracy. We hope our findings contribute to a broader understanding of optimal TTS for LLMs.