We consider the problem of learning models for risk-sensitive reinforcement learning.

Bridging logical reasoning and deep learning is crucial for advanced AI systems.

Large language models (LLMs) achieve remarkable performance in code generation tasks. However, a significant performance disparity persists between popular programming languages (e.g., Python, C++) and others. To address this capability gap, we leverage the code translation task to train LLMs, thereby facilitating the transfer of coding proficiency across diverse programming languages. Moreover, we introduce OORL for training, a novel reinforcement learning (RL) framework that integrates on-policy and off-policy strategies. Within OORL, on-policy RL is applied during code translation, guided by a rule-based reward signal derived from unit tests. Complementing this coarse-grained rule-based reward, we propose Group Equivalent Preference Optimization (GEPO), a novel preference optimization method. Specifically, GEPO trains the LLM using intermediate representations (IRs) groups. LLMs can be guided to discern IRs equivalent to the source code from inequivalent ones, while also utilizing signals about the mutual equivalence between IRs within the group. This process allows LLMs to capture nuanced aspects of code functionality. By employing OORL for training with code translation tasks, LLMs improve their recognition of code functionality and their understanding of the relationships between code implemented in different languages. Extensive experiments demonstrate that our OORL for LLMs training with code translation tasks achieves significant performance improvements on code benchmarks across multiple programming languages.

Despite impressive capabilities, LLMs' successes often rely on pattern-matching behaviors, yet these are also linked to OOD generalization failures in compositional tasks. However, behavioral studies commonly employ task setups that allow multiple generalization sources (e.g., algebraic invariances, structural repetition), obscuring a precise and testable account of how well LLMs perform generalization through pattern matching and their limitations. To address this ambiguity, we first formalize pattern matching as functional equivalence, i.e., identifying pairs of subsequences of inputs that consistently lead to identical results when the rest of the input is held constant. Then, we systematically study how decoder-only Transformer and Mamba behave in controlled tasks with compositional structures that isolate this mechanism. Our formalism yields predictive and quantitative insights: (1) Instance-wise success of pattern matching is well predicted by the number of contexts witnessing the relevant functional equivalence. (2) We prove a tight sample complexity bound of learning a two-hop structure by identifying the exponent of the data scaling law for perfect in-domain generalization. Our empirical results align with the theoretical prediction, under 20x parameter scaling and across architectures. (3) Path ambiguity is a structural barrier: when a variable influences the output via multiple paths, models fail to form unified intermediate state representations, impairing accuracy and interpretability. (4) Chain-of-Thought reduces data requirements yet does not resolve path ambiguity. Hence, we provide a predictive, falsifiable boundary for pattern matching and a foundational diagnostic for disentangling mixed generalization mechanisms.

Given two algorithms for the same problem, can we determine whether they are meaningfully different? In full generality, the question is uncomputable, and empirically it is muddied by competing notions of similarity. Yet, in many applications (such as clone detection or program synthesis) a pragmatic and consistent similarity metric is necessary. We review existing equivalence and similarity notions and introduce EMOC: An Evaluation-Memory-Operations-Complexity framework that embeds algorithm implementations into a feature space suitable for downstream tasks. We compile PACD, a curated dataset of verified Python implementations across three problems, and show that EMOC features support clustering and classification of algorithm types, detection of near-duplicates, and quantification of diversity in LLM-generated programs. Code, data, and utilities for computing EMOC embeddings are released to facilitate reproducibility and future work on algorithm similarity.

The rise of GPU-based high-performance computing (HPC) has driven the widespread adoption of parallel programming models such as CUDA. Yet, the inherent complexity of parallel programming creates a demand for the automated sequential-to-parallel approaches. However, data scarcity poses a significant challenge for machine learning-based sequential-to-parallel code translation. Although recent back-translation methods show promise, they still fail to ensure functional equivalence in the translated code. In this paper, we propose \textbf{QiMeng-MuPa}, a novel \textbf{Mu}tual-Supervised Learning framework for Sequential-to-\textbf{Pa}rallel code translation, to address the functional equivalence issue. QiMeng-MuPa consists of two models, a Translator and a Tester. Through an iterative loop consisting of Co-verify and Co-evolve steps, the Translator and the Tester mutually generate data for each other and improve collectively. The Tester generates unit tests to verify and filter functionally equivalent translated code, thereby evolving the Translator, while the Translator generates translated code as augmented input to evolve the Tester. Experimental results demonstrate that QiMeng-MuPa significantly enhances the performance of the base models: when applied to Qwen2.5-Coder, it not only improves Pass@1 by up to 28.91% and boosts Tester performance by 68.90%, but also outperforms the previous state-of-the-art method CodeRosetta by 1.56 and 6.92 in BLEU and CodeBLEU scores, while achieving performance comparable to DeepSeek-R1 and GPT-4.1. Our code is available at https://github.com/kcxain/mupa.

LLMs have been extensively used for the task of automated code generation. In this work, we examine the applicability of LLMs for the related but relatively unexplored task of code-equivalence checking, i.e., given two programs, whether they are functionally equivalent or not. This is an important problem since benchmarking code equivalence can play a critical role in evaluating LLM capabilities for tasks such as code re-writing and code translation. Towards this end, we present CETBench - Code Equivalence with Transformations Benchmark, constructed via a repository of programs, where two programs in the repository may be solving the same or different tasks. Each instance in our dataset is obtained by taking a pair of programs in the repository and applying a random series of pre-defined code transformations, resulting in (non-)equivalent pairs. Our analysis on this dataset reveals a surprising finding that very simple code transformations in the underlying pair of programs can result in a significant drop in performance of SOTA LLMs for the task of code-equivalence checking. To remedy this, we present a simple fine-tuning-based approach to boost LLM performance on the transformed pairs of programs. Our approach for dataset generation is generic, and can be used with repositories with varying program difficulty levels and allows for applying varying numbers as well as kinds of transformations. In our experiments, we perform ablations over the difficulty level of original programs, as well as the kind of transformations used in generating pairs for equivalence checking. Our analysis presents deep insights into the working of LLMs for the task of code-equivalence, and points to the fact that they may still be far from what could be termed as a semantic understanding of the underlying code.

Foundation models serve as the backbone for numerous specialized models developed through fine-tuning. However, when the underlying pretrained model is updated or retrained (e.g., on larger and more curated datasets), the fine-tuned model becomes obsolete, losing its utility and requiring retraining. This raises the question: is it possible to transfer fine-tuning to a new release of the model? In this work, we investigate how to transfer fine-tuning to a new checkpoint without having to re-train, in a data-free manner. To do so, we draw principles from model re-basin and provide a recipe based on weight permutations to re-base the modifications made to the original base model, often called task vector. In particular, our approach tailors model re-basin for Transformer models, taking into account the challenges of residual connections and multi-head attention layers. Specifically, we propose a two-level method rooted in spectral theory, initially permuting the attention heads and subsequently adjusting parameters within select pairs of heads. Through extensive experiments on visual and textual tasks, we achieve the seamless transfer of fine-tuned knowledge to new pre-trained backbones without relying on a single training step or datapoint. Code is available at https://github.com/aimagelab/TransFusion.