Reinforcement Learning (RL) has emerged as a powerful paradigm for advancing Large Language Models (LLMs), achieving remarkable performance in complex reasoning domains such as mathematics and code generation. However, current RL methods face a fundamental scalability bottleneck due to their heavy reliance on human-curated preference data or labeled datasets for reward modeling. To overcome this limitation, we explore RL on unlabeled data where models learn autonomously from continuous experience streams. The core challenge in this setting lies in reliable reward estimation without ground-truth supervision. Existing approaches like Test-Time RL address this through self-consistent consensus, but risk reinforcing incorrect pseudo-labels derived from majority voting. We introduce COMPASS (Composite Path and Answer Self-Scoring), a novel test-time reward mechanism that operates without external supervision. COMPASS integrates two complementary components: the Dual-Calibration Answer Reward (DCAR), which stabilizes training by establishing trustworthy pseudo-labels through confidence and credibility calibration, and the Decisive Path Reward (DPR), which directly optimizes the reasoning process quality beyond mere outcome supervision. By jointly reinforcing trustworthy consensus answers and highly decisive reasoning chains, the COMPASS systematically enhances the model's analytical capabilities. Extensive experiments show that COMPASS achieves significant and consistent performance gains across diverse reasoning tasks and model architectures, advancing a more scalable direction for LLMs to learn from continuous experience.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown strong potential for recommendation by framing item prediction as a token-by-token language generation task. However, existing methods treat all item tokens equally, simply pursuing likelihood maximization during both optimization and decoding. This overlooks crucial token-level differences in decisiveness-many tokens contribute little to item discrimination yet can dominate optimization or decoding. To quantify token decisiveness, we propose a novel perspective that models item generation as a decision process, measuring token decisiveness by the Information Gain (IG) each token provides in reducing uncertainty about the generated item. Our empirical analysis reveals that most tokens have low IG but often correspond to high logits, disproportionately influencing training loss and decoding, which may impair model performance. Building on these insights, we introduce an Information Gain-based Decisiveness-aware Token handling (IGD) strategy that integrates token decisiveness into both tuning and decoding. Specifically, IGD downweights low-IG tokens during tuning and rebalances decoding to emphasize tokens with high IG. In this way, IGD moves beyond pure likelihood maximization, effectively prioritizing high-decisiveness tokens. Extensive experiments on four benchmark datasets with two LLM backbones demonstrate that IGD consistently improves recommendation accuracy, achieving significant gains on widely used ranking metrics compared to strong baselines.

A critical component in the trustworthiness of LLMs is reliable uncertainty communication, yet LLMs often use assertive language when conveying false claims, leading to over-reliance and eroded trust. We present the first systematic study of $\textit{faithful confidence calibration}$ of LLMs, benchmarking models' ability to use linguistic expressions of uncertainty that $\textit{faithfully reflect}$ their intrinsic uncertainty, across a comprehensive array of models, datasets, and prompting strategies. Our results demonstrate that LLMs largely fail at this task, and that existing interventions are insufficient: standard prompt approaches provide only marginal gains, and existing, factuality-based calibration techniques can even harm faithful calibration. To address this critical gap, we introduce MetaFaith, a novel prompt-based calibration approach inspired by human metacognition. We show that MetaFaith robustly improves faithful calibration across diverse models and task domains, enabling up to 61% improvement in faithfulness and achieving an 83% win rate over original generations as judged by humans.

We posit that large language models (LLMs) should be capable of expressing their intrinsic uncertainty in natural language. For example, if the LLM is equally likely to output two contradicting answers to the same question, then its generated response should reflect this uncertainty by hedging its answer (e.g., "I'm not sure, but I think..."). We formalize faithful response uncertainty based on the gap between the model's intrinsic confidence in the assertions it makes and the decisiveness by which they are conveyed. This example-level metric reliably indicates whether the model reflects its uncertainty, as it penalizes both excessive and insufficient hedging. We evaluate a variety of aligned LLMs at faithfully communicating uncertainty on several knowledge-intensive question answering tasks. Our results provide strong evidence that modern LLMs are poor at faithfully conveying their uncertainty, and that better alignment is necessary to improve their trustworthiness.

Maximization of mutual information between the model's input and output is formally related to "decisiveness" and "fairness" of the softmax predictions, motivating such unsupervised entropy-based losses for discriminative models. Recent self-labeling methods based on such losses represent the state of the art in deep clustering. First, we discuss a number of general properties of such entropy clustering methods, including their relation to K-means and unsupervised SVM-based techniques. Disproving some earlier published claims, we point out fundamental differences with K-means. On the other hand, we show similarity with SVM-based clustering allowing us to link explicit margin maximization to entropy clustering. Finally, we observe that the common form of cross-entropy is not robust to pseudo-label errors. Our new loss addresses the problem and leads to a new EM algorithm improving the state of the art on many standard benchmarks.

Digital technology is widely accepted as a necessary part of driving improved supply chain efficiency and effectiveness. But some business leaders think it could go a step further, suggesting the technology could propel not only greater productivity, but help craft an autonomous supply chain able to identify, forecast and fix problems on its own. A combination of technologies, from artificial intelligence (AI) and machine-learning to digital twins and cloud computing, have made it increasingly possible for end-to-end supply chains to make decisions without the need for human intervention. These technologies, which appear to have all the right ingredients for the formation of an autonomous supply chain, are slowly permeating the market. Ocado is using advanced autonomous supply chain processes to help make accurate predictions.