Search is an important technique in program synthesis that allows for adaptive strategies such as focusing on particular search directions based on execution results. Several prior works have demonstrated that neural models are effective at guiding program synthesis searches.

Majority voting has proven effective for close-ended question answering by aggregating parallel reasoning traces. However, it is not directly applicable to open-ended reasoning, such as code generation and web-based deep research, where a "majority" over complete solutions is ill-defined. Empirically, it matches or surpasses majority voting on AIME and GPQA, while delivering consistent gains on open-ended coding tasks: on LiveCodeBench (hard), pass@1 improves by +8.28% for DeepCoder-14B-Preview and +7.58% for Qwen3-8B. These results demonstrate that parallel test-time scaling can benefit open-ended reasoning without relying on voting over complete outputs. Recent advances in Large Language Models (LLMs) have been driven by test-time compute scaling. As evidenced by OpenAI's o1 (OpenAI, 2024), DeepSeek-R1 (Guo et al., 2025), etc., models generate extended "think" segments that reflect intermediate hypotheses, derivations, and self-corrections prior to emitting the final answer (Chen et al., 2025b; Y ang et al., 2025c). Such sequential test-time scaling has established a new paradigm: increasing the inference-time computation (e.g., longer reasoning traces) often leads to improved accuracy and problem-solving capability. Y et simply lengthening the chain has diminishing returns and can even hurt, e.g., overthinking (Chen et al., 2024; Cuadron et al., 2025), with studies showing that correct answers often appear in shorter traces (Zeng et al., 2025).

Hypothesis generation in biomedical research has traditionally centered on uncovering hidden relationships within vast scientific literature, often using methods like Literature-Based Discovery (LBD). Despite progress, current approaches typically depend on single data types or predefined extraction patterns, which restricts the discovery of novel and complex connections. Recent advances in Large Language Model (LLM) agents show significant potential, with capabilities in information retrieval, reasoning, and generation. However, their application to biomedical hypothesis generation has been limited by the absence of standardized datasets and execution environments. To address this, we introduce BioVerge, a comprehensive benchmark, and BioVerge Agent, an LLM-based agent framework, to create a standardized environment for exploring biomedical hypothesis generation at the frontier of existing scientific knowledge. Our dataset includes structured and textual data derived from historical biomedical hypotheses and PubMed literature, organized to support exploration by LLM agents. BioVerge Agent utilizes a ReAct-based approach with distinct Generation and Evaluation modules that iteratively produce and self-assess hypothesis proposals. Through extensive experimentation, we uncover key insights: 1) different architectures of BioVerge Agent influence exploration diversity and reasoning strategies; 2) structured and textual information sources each provide unique, critical contexts that enhance hypothesis generation; and 3) self-evaluation significantly improves the novelty and relevance of proposed hypotheses.

Consensus clustering, a fundamental task in machine learning and data analysis, aims to aggregate multiple input clusterings of a dataset, potentially based on different non-sensitive attributes, into a single clustering that best represents the collective structure of the data. In this work, we study this fundamental problem through the lens of fair clustering, as introduced by Chierichetti et al. [NeurIPS'17], which incorporates the disparate impact doctrine to ensure proportional representation of each protected group in the dataset within every cluster. Our objective is to find a consensus clustering that is not only representative but also fair with respect to specific protected attributes. To the best of our knowledge, we are the first to address this problem and provide a constant-factor approximation. As part of our investigation, we examine how to minimally modify an existing clustering to enforce fairness -- an essential postprocessing step in many clustering applications that require fair representation. We develop an optimal algorithm for datasets with equal group representation and near-linear time constant factor approximation algorithms for more general scenarios with different proportions of two group sizes. We complement our approximation result by showing that the problem is NP-hard for two unequal-sized groups. Given the fundamental nature of this problem, we believe our results on Closest Fair Clustering could have broader implications for other clustering problems, particularly those for which no prior approximation guarantees exist for their fair variants.

Large language models, such as ChatGPT, Claude, or LLaMA, are gigantic, monolithic, and possess the superpower to simultaneously support thousands of tasks. However, high-throughput applications often prefer smaller task-specific models because of their lower latency and cost. One challenge of using task-specific models is the incremental need for solving newer tasks after the model is already deployed for existing tasks. A straightforward solution requires fine-tuning the model again for both existing and new tasks, which is computationally expensive and time-consuming. To address this issue, we propose a model merging based approach called SUPERMERGE. SUPERMERGE is a gradient-based method to systematically merge several fine-tuned models trained on existing and new tasks. SUPERMERGE is designed to be lightweight and fast, and the merged model achieves similar performance to fully fine-tuned models on all tasks. Furthermore, we proposed a hierarchical model merging strategy to reduce the peak space requirement without sacrificing the performance of the merged model. We experimentally demonstrate that SUPERMERGE outperforms existing model merging methods on common natural language processing and computer vision tasks.

There is a growing interest in training domain-expert LLMs that excel in specific technical fields compared to their general-purpose instruction-tuned counterparts. However, these expert models often experience a loss in their safety abilities in the process, making them capable of generating harmful content. As a solution, we introduce an efficient and effective merging-based alignment method called \textsc{MergeAlign} that interpolates the domain and alignment vectors, creating safer domain-specific models while preserving their utility. We apply \textsc{MergeAlign} on Llama3 variants that are experts in medicine and finance, obtaining substantial alignment improvements with minimal to no degradation on domain-specific benchmarks. We study the impact of model merging through model similarity metrics and contributions of individual models being merged. We hope our findings open new research avenues and inspire more efficient development of safe expert LLMs.

Search is an important technique in program synthesis that allows for adaptive strategies such as focusing on particular search directions based on execution results. Several prior works have demonstrated that neural models are effective at guiding program synthesis searches. However, a common drawback of those approaches is the inability to handle iterative loops, higher-order functions, or lambda functions, thus limiting prior neural searches from synthesizing longer and more general programs. We address this gap by designing a search algorithm called LambdaBeam that can construct arbitrary lambda functions that compose operations within a given DSL. We create semantic vector representations of the execution behavior of the lambda functions and train a neural policy network to choose which lambdas to construct during search, and pass them as arguments to higher-order functions to perform looping computations. Our experiments show that LambdaBeam outperforms neural, symbolic, and LLM-based techniques in an integer list manipulation domain.

Machine learned models often must abide by certain requirements (e.g., fairness or legal). This has spurred interested in developing approaches that can provably verify whether a model satisfies certain properties. This paper introduces a generic algorithm called Veritas that enables tackling multiple different verification tasks for tree ensemble models like random forests (RFs) and gradient boosting decision trees (GBDTs). This generality contrasts with previous work, which has focused exclusively on either adversarial example generation or robustness checking. Veritas formulates the verification task as a generic optimization problem and introduces a novel search space representation. Veritas offers two key advantages. First, it provides anytime lower and upper bounds when the optimization problem cannot be solved exactly. In contrast, many existing methods have focused on exact solutions and are thus limited by the verification problem being NP-complete. Second, Veritas produces full (bounded suboptimal) solutions that can be used to generate concrete examples. We experimentally show that Veritas outperforms the previous state of the art by (a) generating exact solutions more frequently, (b) producing tighter bounds when (a) is not possible, and (c) offering orders of magnitude speed ups. Subsequently, Veritas enables tackling more and larger real-world verification scenarios.