Vision-Language Models (VLMs) have achieved remarkable progress, yet their large scale often renders them impractical for resource-constrained environments.

Video understanding is fundamental to tasks such as action recognition, video reasoning, and robotic control. Early video understanding methods based on large vision-language models (LVLMs) typically adopt a single-pass reasoning paradigm without dynamic feedback, limiting the model's capacity to self-correct and adapt in complex scenarios. Recent efforts have attempted to address this limitation by incorporating reward models and reinforcement learning to enhance reasoning, or by employing tool-agent frameworks. However, these approaches face several challenges, including high annotation costs, reward signals that fail to capture real-time reasoning states, and low inference efficiency. To overcome these issues, we propose ReAgent-V, a novel agentic video understanding framework that integrates efficient frame selection with real-time reward generation during inference. These reward signals not only guide iterative answer refinement through a multi-perspective reflection mechanism--adjusting predictions from conservative, neutral, and aggressive viewpoints--but also enable automatic filtering of high-quality data for supervised fine-tuning (SFT), direct preference optimization (DPO), and group relative policy optimization (GRPO). ReAgent-V is lightweight, modular, and extensible, supporting flexible tool integration tailored to diverse tasks. Extensive experiments on 12 datasets across three core applications--video understanding, video reasoning enhancement, and vision-language-action model alignment--demonstrate significant gains in generalization and reasoning, with improvements of up to 6.9%, 2.1%, and 9.8%, respectively, highlighting the effectiveness and versatility of the proposed framework.

This position paper argues for two claims regarding AI testing and evaluation. First, to remain informative about deployment behaviour, evaluations need account for the possibility that AI systems understand their circumstances and reason strategically. Second, game-theoretic analysis can inform evaluation design by formalising and scrutinising the reasoning in evaluation-based safety cases. Drawing on examples from existing AI systems, a review of relevant research, and formal strategic analysis of a stylised evaluation scenario, we present evidence for these claims and motivate several research directions.

Large language models are increasingly used to support high-stakes decisions, potentially influencing who is granted bail or receives a loan. Naive chain-ofthought sampling can improve average decision accuracy, but has also been shown to amplify unfair bias. To address this challenge and enable the trustworthy use of reasoning models in high-stakes decision-making, we propose a framework for training a generalizable Fairness Reward Model (FRM). Our model assigns a fairness score to LLM reasoning, enabling the system to down-weight biased trajectories and favor equitable ones when aggregating decisions across reasoning chains. We show that a single Fairness Reward Model, trained on weakly supervised, LLM-annotated examples of biased versus unbiased reasoning, transfers across tasks, domains, and model families without additional fine-tuning. When applied to real-world decision-making tasks including recidivism prediction and social media moderation, our approach consistently improves fairness while matching, or even surpassing, baseline accuracy.

The rapid advancements in large language models (LLMs), particularly in their reasoning capabilities, hold transformative potential for addressing complex challenges and boosting scientific discovery in atmospheric science. However, leveraging LLMs effectively in this domain requires a robust and comprehensive evaluation benchmark. Toward this end, we present ATMOSSCI-BENCH, a novel benchmark designed to systematically assess LLM performance across five core categories of atmospheric science problems: hydrology, atmospheric dynamics, atmospheric physics, geophysics, and physical oceanography. ATMOSSCI-BENCH features a dual-format design comprising both multiple-choice questions (MCQs) and open-ended questions (OEQs), enabling scalable automated evaluation alongside deeper analysis of conceptual understanding. We employ a template-based MCQ generation framework to create diverse, graduate-level problems with symbolic perturbation, while OEQs are used to probe open-ended reasoning. We conduct a comprehensive evaluation of representative LLMs, categorized into four groups: instruction-tuned models, advanced reasoning models, math-augmented models, and domain-specific climate models. Our analysis provides some interesting insights into the reasoning and problem-solving capabilities of LLMs in atmospheric science. We believe ATMOSSCI-BENCH can serve as a critical step toward advancing LLM applications in climate services by offering a standard and rigorous evaluation framework.

We propose GAM-Agent, a game-theoretic multi-agent framework for enhancing vision-language reasoning. Unlike prior single-agent or monolithic models, GAM-Agent formulates the reasoning process as a non-zero-sum game between base agents--each specializing in visual perception subtasks--and a critical agent that verifies logic consistency and factual correctness. Agents communicate via structured claims, evidence, and uncertainty estimates. The framework introduces an uncertainty-aware controller to dynamically adjust agent collaboration, triggering multi-round debates when disagreement or ambiguity is detected.

As textual reasoning with large language models (LLMs) has advanced significantly, there has been growing interest in enhancing the multimodal reasoning capabilities of large vision-language models (LVLMs). However, existing methods primarily approach multimodal reasoning in a straightforward, text-centric manner, where both reasoning and answer derivation are conducted purely through text, with the only difference being the presence of multimodal input. As a result, these methods often encounter fundamental limitations in spatial reasoning tasks that demand precise geometric understanding and continuous spatial tracking--capabilities that humans achieve through mental visualization and manipulation. To address the limitations, we propose drawing to reason in space, a novel paradigm that enables LVLMs to reason through elementary drawing operations in the visual space. By equipping models with basic drawing operations, including annotating bounding boxes and drawing auxiliary lines, we empower them to express and analyze spatial relationships through direct visual manipulation, meanwhile avoiding the performance ceiling imposed by specialized perception tools in previous tool-integrated reasoning approaches. To cultivate this capability, we develop a three-stage training framework: cold-start training with synthetic data to establish basic drawing abilities, reflective rejection sampling to enhance self-reflection behaviors, and reinforcement learning to directly optimize for target rewards. Extensive experiments demonstrate that our model, named VILASR, consistently outperforms existing methods across diverse spatial reasoning benchmarks, involving maze navigation, static spatial reasoning, video-based reasoning, and multi-view-based reasoning tasks, with an average improvement of 18.4%. Ablation studies reveal the critical role of each training stage, where reflective rejection sampling strengthens the model's self-correction capabilities, and reinforcement learning effectively unlocks its reasoning potential.

World models, which explicitly learn environmental dynamics to lay the foundation for planning, reasoning, and decision-making, are rapidly advancing in predicting both physical dynamics and aspects of social behavior, yet predominantly in separate silos. This division results in a systemic failure to model the crucial interplay between physical environments and social constructs, rendering current models fundamentally incapable of adequately addressing the true complexity of real-world systems where physical and social realities are inextricably intertwined. This position paper argues that the systematic, bidirectional unification of physical and social predictive capabilities is the next crucial frontier for world model development. We contend that comprehensive world models must holistically integrate objective physical laws with the subjective, evolving, and context-dependent nature of social dynamics. Such unification is paramount for AI to robustly navigate complex real-world challenges and achieve more generalizable intelligence.

Despite recent advances on multi-modal models, 3D spatial reasoning remains a challenging task for state-of-the-art open-source and proprietary models. Recent studies explore data-driven approaches and achieve enhanced spatial reasoning performance by fine-tuning models on 3D-related visual question-answering data. However, these methods typically perform spatial reasoning in an implicit manner and often fail on questions that are trivial to humans, even with long chain-ofthought reasoning. In this work, we introduce SpatialReasoner, a novel large visionlanguage model (LVLM) that addresses 3D spatial reasoning with explicit 3D representations shared between multiple stages-3D perception, computation, and reasoning. Explicit 3D representations provide a coherent interface that supports advanced 3D spatial reasoning and improves the generalization ability to novel question types. Furthermore, by analyzing the explicit 3D representations in multistep reasoning traces of SpatialReasoner, we study the factual errors and identify key shortcomings of current LVLMs. Results show that our SpatialReasoner achieves improved performance on a variety of spatial reasoning benchmarks, outperforming Gemini 2.0 by 9.2% on 3DSRBench, and generalizes better when evaluating on novel 3D spatial reasoning questions.

Table Question Answering (TableQA) combines natural language understanding and structured data reasoning, posing challenges in semantic interpretation and logical inference. Recent advances in Large Language Models (LLMs) have improved TableQA performance through Direct Prompting and Agent paradigms. However, these models often rely on spurious correlations, as they tend to overfit to token co-occurrence patterns in pretraining corpora, rather than perform genuine reasoning. To address this issue, we propose Causal Intervention TableQA (CIT), which is based on a structural causal graph and applies front-door adjustment to eliminate bias caused by token co-occurrence. CIT formalizes TableQA as a causal graph and identifies token co-occurrence patterns as confounders. By applying front-door adjustment, CIT guides question variant generation and reasoning to reduce confounding effects. Experiments on multiple benchmarks show that CIT achieves state-of-the-art performance, demonstrating its effectiveness in mitigating bias. Consistent gains across various LLMs further confirm its generalizability. We release our code here.