Recent progress in large language models (LLMs) has been propelled by reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) and test-time scaling. However, the limited output length of LLMs constrains the depth of reasoning attainable in a single inference process. Multi-agent reasoning systems offer a promising alternative by employing multiple agents including Solver, Verifier, and Corrector, to iteratively refine solutions. While effective in closed-source models like Gemini 2.5 Pro, they struggle to generalize to open-source models due to insufficient critic and correction capabilities. To address this, we propose MarsRL, a novel reinforcement learning framework with agentic pipeline parallelism, designed to jointly optimize all agents in the system. MarsRL introduces agent-specific reward mechanisms to mitigate reward noise and employs pipeline-inspired training to enhance efficiency in handling long trajectories. Applied to Qwen3-30B-A3B-Thinking-2507, MarsRL improves AIME2025 accuracy from 86.5% to 93.3% and BeyondAIME from 64.9% to 73.8%, even surpassing Qwen3-235B-A22B-Thinking-2507. These findings highlight the potential of MarsRL to advance multi-agent reasoning systems and broaden their applicability across diverse reasoning tasks.

In theorem proving, the task of selecting useful premises from a large library to unlock the proof of a given conjecture is crucially important.

Large language models (LLMs) can already identify patterns and reason effectively, yet their variable accuracy hampers adoption in high-stakes decision-making applications. In this paper, we study this issue from a venture capital perspective by predicting idea-stage startup success based on founder traits. (i) To build a reliable prediction model, we introduce LLM-AR, a pipeline inspired by neural-symbolic systems that distils LLM-generated heuristics into probabilistic rules executed by the ProbLog automated-reasoning engine. (ii) An iterative policy-evolution loop incorporates association-rule mining to progressively refine the prediction rules. On unseen folds, LLM-AR achieves 59.5% precision and 8.7% recall, 5.9x the random baseline precision, while exposing every decision path for human inspection. The framework is interpretable and tunable via hyperparameters, showing promise to extend into other domains.

K2-Think is a reasoning system that achieves state-of-the-art performance with a 32B parameter model, matching or surpassing much larger models like GPT-OSS 120B and DeepSeek v3.1. Built on the Qwen2.5 base model, our system shows that smaller models can compete at the highest levels by combining advanced post-training and test-time computation techniques. The approach is based on six key technical pillars: Long Chain-of-thought Supervised Finetuning, Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR), Agentic planning prior to reasoning, Test-time Scaling, Speculative Decoding, and Inference-optimized Hardware, all using publicly available open-source datasets. K2-Think excels in mathematical reasoning, achieving state-of-the-art scores on public benchmarks for open-source models, while also performing strongly in other areas such as Code and Science. Our results confirm that a more parameter-efficient model like K2-Think 32B can compete with state-of-the-art systems through an integrated post-training recipe that includes long chain-of-thought training and strategic inference-time enhancements, making open-source reasoning systems more accessible and affordable. K2-Think is freely available at k2think.ai, offering best-in-class inference speeds of over 2,000 tokens per second per request via the Cerebras Wafer-Scale Engine.

We introduce Spectral NSR, a fully spectral neuro-symbolic reasoning framework that embeds logical rules as spectral templates and performs inference directly in the graph spectral domain. By leveraging graph signal processing (GSP) and frequency-selective filters grounded in the Laplacian eigenstructure of knowledge graphs, the architecture unifies the interpretability of symbolic reasoning with the scalability and adaptability of spectral learning. Beyond the core formulation, we incorporate a comprehensive set of extensions, including dynamic graph and basis learning, rational and diffusion filters for sharper spectral selectivity, mixture-of-spectral-experts for modular specialization, proof-guided training with spectral curricula, and uncertainty quantification for calibrated confidence. Additional enhancements such as large language model coupling, co-spectral transfer alignment, adversarial robustness, efficient GPU kernels, generalized Laplacians, and causal interventions further expand the versatility of the framework. Empirical evaluation on state-of-the-art reasoning benchmarks such as ProofWriter and CLUTRR demonstrates that Spectral NSR achieves superior accuracy, faster inference, improved robustness to adversarial perturbations, and higher interpretability compared to leading baselines including transformers, message-passing neural networks, and neuro-symbolic logic programming systems. Spectral attribution and proof-band agreement analyses confirm that model decisions align closely with symbolic proof structures, while transfer experiments validate effective domain adaptation through co-spectral alignment. These results establish Spectral NSR as a scalable and principled foundation for the next generation of reasoning systems, offering transparency, robustness, and generalization beyond conventional approaches.

This paper outlines a general formal framework for reasoning systems, intended to support future analysis of inference architectures across domains. We model reasoning systems as structured tuples comprising phenomena, explanation space, inference and generation maps, and a principle base. The formulation accommodates logical, algorithmic, and learning-based reasoning processes within a unified structural schema, while remaining agnostic to any specific reasoning algorithm or logic system. We survey basic internal criteria--including coherence, soundness, and completeness-and catalog typical failure modes such as contradiction, incompleteness, and non-convergence. The framework also admits dynamic behaviors like iterative refinement and principle evolution. The goal of this work is to establish a foundational structure for representing and comparing reasoning systems, particularly in contexts where internal failure, adaptation, or fragmentation may arise. No specific solution architecture is proposed; instead, we aim to support future theoretical and practical investigations into reasoning under structural constraint.

Intelligence-biological, artificial, or collective-requires structural coherence across recursive reasoning processes to scale effectively. As complex systems grow, coherence becomes fragile unless a higher-order structure ensures semantic consistency. This paper introduces the Recursive Coherence Principle (RCP): a foundational constraint stating that for any reasoning system of order N, composed of systems operating over conceptual spaces of order N-1, semantic coherence is preserved only by a recursively evaluable generalization operator that spans and aligns those lower-order conceptual spaces. Crucially, this coherence enables structural alignment. Without recursive coherence, no system can reliably preserve goals, meanings, or reasoning consistency at scale. We formally define the Functional Model of Intelligence (FMI) as the only known operator capable of satisfying the RCP at any scale. The FMI is a minimal, composable architecture with internal functions (evaluation, modeling, adaptation, stability, decomposition, bridging) and external functions (storage, recall, System 1 and System 2 reasoning) vital for preserving semantic structure across inference and coordination layers. We prove that any system lacking the FMI will experience recursive coherence breakdown as it scales, arguing that common AI issues like misalignment, hallucination, and instability are symptoms of this structural coherence loss. Unlike other foundational principles, RCP uniquely captures the internal, recursive dynamics needed for coherent, alignable intelligence, modeling semantic coherence under recursion. This work significantly impacts AI alignment, advocating a shift from behavioral constraints to structural coherence, and offers a pathway for safely generalizable, robustly coherent AI at scale.

This paper outlines a comprehensive theoretical and architectural framework for constructing epistemically grounded artificial intelligence systems capable of propositional commitment, metacognitive reasoning, contradiction detection, and normative truth maintenance. Moving beyond the constraints of stochastic language generation, we propose a model in which artificial agents engage in structured, rule-governed reasoning that adheres to explicit epistemic norms. The approach integrates insights from epistemology, formal logic, inferential semantics, knowledge graph structuring, probabilistic justification, and immutable blockchain evidence to create systems that do not merely simulate knowledge, but operate under explicit, verifiable constraints on belief, justification, and truth. We begin with an analysis of epistemic norms in artificial reasoning, contrasting evi-dentialist, Bayesian, and logical foundations, and establishing a requirement for internal consistency and constraint against falsehood. Central to the proposed system is a prohibition against internal deception: no model component may assert what it internally contradicts.

This paper introduces an explanation framework designed to enhance the quality of rules in knowledge-based reasoning systems based on dataset-driven insights. The traditional method for rule induction from data typically requires labor-intensive labeling and data-driven learning. This framework provides an alternative and instead allows for the data-driven refinement of existing rules: it generates explanations of rule inferences and leverages human interpretation to refine rules. It leverages four complementary explanation types: trace-based, contextual, contrastive, and counterfactual, providing diverse perspectives for debugging, validating, and ultimately refining rules. By embedding explainability into the reasoning architecture, the framework enables knowledge engineers to address inconsistencies, optimize thresholds, and ensure fairness, transparency, and interpretability in decision-making processes. Its practicality is demonstrated through a use case in finance.