Not Every Rubric Teaches Equally: Policy-Aware Rubric Rewards for RLVR

Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards has made post-training highly effective when correctness can be checked automatically. However, many important model behaviors require satisfying several qualitative criteria at once. Rubric-based rewards address this setting by grading prompt-specific criteria and aggregating them into a scalar reward. Yet standard static aggregations conflate a criterion's human-assigned importance with its current usefulness as an optimization signal. We show that this assumption breaks down in rubric RL: many important criteria are already saturated or currently unreachable, while criteria that distinguish rollouts are not necessarily those with the largest human weights. We introduce POW3R, a policy-aware rubric reward framework that preserves human weights and category balance as the rubric objective while adapting criterion-level reward weights during training. POW3R uses rollout-level contrast to emphasize criteria that currently separate the policy's outputs, making the GRPO reward more informative without changing the underlying evaluation target. Across three base policies on two datasets spanning multimodal and text-only settings, POW3R wins $24$ of $30$ base-policy/metric comparisons, improving both mean rubric reward and strict completion (the fraction of prompts whose response satisfies every required rubric criterion) over vanilla GRPO with rubric rewards, and reaches the same plateau in $2.5$--$4\times$ fewer training steps. Rubric rewards should therefore distinguish what should matter in the final answer from what can teach the current policy.

Reward Hacking in Rubric-Based Reinforcement Learning

Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards has enabled strong post-training gains in domains such as math and coding, though many open-ended settings rely on rubric-based rewards. We study reward hacking in rubric-based RL, where a policy is optimized against a training verifier but evaluated against a cross-family panel of three frontier judges, reducing dependence on any single evaluator. Our framework separates two sources of divergence: verifier failure, where the training verifier credits rubric criteria that reference verifiers reject, and rubric-design limitations, where even strong rubric-based verifiers favor responses that rubric-free judges rate worse overall. Across medical and science domains, weak verifiers produce large proxy-reward gains that do not transfer to the reference verifiers; exploitation grows over training and concentrates in recurring failures such as partial satisfaction of compound criteria, treating implicit content as explicit, and imprecise topical matching. Stronger verifiers substantially reduce, but do not eliminate, verifier exploitation. We also introduce a self-internalization gap, a verifier-free diagnostic based on policy log-probabilities, which tracks reference-verifier quality, detecting when the policy trained using the weak verifier stops improving. Finally, in our setting, stronger verification does not prevent reward hacking when the rubric leaves important failure modes unspecified: rubric-based verifiers prefer the RL checkpoint, while rubric-free judges prefer the base model. These disagreements coincide with gains concentrated in completeness and presence-based criteria, alongside declines in factual correctness, conciseness, relevance, and overall quality. Together, these results suggest that stronger verification reduces reward hacking, but does not by itself ensure that rubric gains correspond to broader quality gains.

HiL-Bench (Human-in-Loop Benchmark): Do Agents Know When to Ask for Help?

Frontier coding agents solve complex tasks when given complete context but collapse when specifications are incomplete or ambiguous. The bottleneck is not raw capability, but judgment: knowing when to act autonomously and when to ask for help. Current benchmarks are blind to this failure mode. They supply unambiguous detailed instructions and solely reward execution correctness, so an agent that makes a lucky guess for a missing requirement will score identically to one that would have asked to be certain. We present HiL-Bench (Human-in-the-Loop Benchmark) to measure this selective escalation skill. Each task contains human-validated blockers (missing information, ambiguous requests, contradictory information) that surface only through progressive exploration, not upfront inspection. Our core metric, Ask-F1, the harmonic mean of question precision and blocker recall, captures the tension between over-asking and silent guessing; its structure architecturally prevents gaming through question spam. Evaluation across SWE and text-to-SQL domains reveals a large universal judgment gap: no frontier model recovers more than a fraction of its full-information performance when deciding whether to ask. Failure analysis identifies three key help-seeking patterns: overconfident wrong beliefs with no gap detection; high uncertainty detection yet persistent errors; broad, imprecise escalation without self-correction. These consistent patterns confirm poor help-seeking is a model-level flaw, not task-specific. RL training on shaped Ask-F1 reward shows judgment is trainable: a 32B model improves both help-seeking quality and task pass rate, with gains that transfer across domains. The model does not learn domain-specific heuristics for when to ask; it learns to detect unresolvable uncertainty and act on it.

SciPredict: Can LLMs Predict the Outcomes of Scientific Experiments in Natural Sciences?

Accelerating scientific discovery requires the identification of which experiments would yield the best outcomes before committing resources to costly physical validation. While existing benchmarks evaluate LLMs on scientific knowledge and reasoning, their ability to predict experimental outcomes - a task where AI could significantly exceed human capabilities - remains largely underexplored. We introduce SciPredict, a benchmark comprising 405 tasks derived from recent empirical studies in 33 specialized sub-fields of physics, biology, and chemistry. SciPredict addresses two critical questions: (a) can LLMs predict the outcome of scientific experiments with sufficient accuracy? and (b) can such predictions be reliably used in the scientific research process? Evaluations reveal fundamental limitations on both fronts. Model accuracies are 14-26% and human expert performance is $\approx$20%. Although some frontier models exceed human performance model accuracy is still far below what would enable reliable experimental guidance. Even within the limited performance, models fail to distinguish reliable predictions from unreliable ones, achieving only $\approx$20% accuracy regardless of their confidence or whether they judge outcomes as predictable without physical experimentation. Human experts, in contrast, demonstrate strong calibration: their accuracy increases from $\approx$5% to $\approx$80% as they deem outcomes more predictable without conducting the experiment. SciPredict establishes a rigorous framework demonstrating that superhuman performance in experimental science requires not just better predictions, but better awareness of prediction reliability. For reproducibility all our data and code are provided at https://github.com/scaleapi/scipredict

MCP-Atlas: A Large-Scale Benchmark for Tool-Use Competency with Real MCP Servers

The Model Context Protocol (MCP) is rapidly becoming the standard interface for Large Language Models (LLMs) to discover and invoke external tools. However, existing evaluations often fail to capture the complexity of real-world scenarios, relying on restricted toolsets, simplistic workflows, or subjective LLM-as-a-judge metrics. We introduce MCP-Atlas, a large-scale benchmark for evaluating tool-use competency, comprising 36 real MCP servers and 220 tools. It includes 1,000 tasks designed to assess tool-use competency in realistic, multi-step workflows. Tasks use natural language prompts that avoid naming specific tools or servers, requiring agents to identify and orchestrate 3-6 tool calls across multiple servers. We score tasks using a claims-based rubric that awards partial credit based on the factual claims satisfied in the model's final answer, complemented by internal diagnostics on tool discovery, parameterization, syntax, error recovery, and efficiency. Evaluation results on frontier models reveal that top models achieve pass rates exceeding 50%, with primary failures arising from inadequate tool usage and task understanding. We release the task schema, containerized harness, and a 500-task public subset of the benchmark dataset to facilitate reproducible comparisons and advance the development of robust, tool-augmented agents.

Youtu-Parsing: Perception, Structuring and Recognition via High-Parallelism Decoding

This paper presents Youtu-Parsing, an efficient and versatile document parsing model designed for high-performance content extraction. The architecture employs a native Vision Transformer (ViT) featuring a dynamic-resolution visual encoder to extract shared document features, coupled with a prompt-guided Youtu-LLM-2B language model for layout analysis and region-prompted decoding. Leveraging this decoupled and feature-reusable framework, we introduce a high-parallelism decoding strategy comprising two core components: token parallelism and query parallelism. The token parallelism strategy concurrently generates up to 64 candidate tokens per inference step, which are subsequently validated through a verification mechanism. This approach yields a 5--11x speedup over traditional autoregressive decoding and is particularly well-suited for highly structured scenarios, such as table recognition. To further exploit the advantages of region-prompted decoding, the query parallelism strategy enables simultaneous content prediction for multiple bounding boxes (up to five), providing an additional 2x acceleration while maintaining output quality equivalent to standard decoding. Youtu-Parsing encompasses a diverse range of document elements, including text, formulas, tables, charts, seals, and hierarchical structures. Furthermore, the model exhibits strong robustness when handling rare characters, multilingual text, and handwritten content. Extensive evaluations demonstrate that Youtu-Parsing achieves state-of-the-art (SOTA) performance on both the OmniDocBench and olmOCR-bench benchmarks. Overall, Youtu-Parsing demonstrates significant experimental value and practical utility for large-scale document intelligence applications.

Youtu-VL: Unleashing Visual Potential via Unified Vision-Language Supervision

Despite the significant advancements represented by Vision-Language Models (VLMs), current architectures often exhibit limitations in retaining fine-grained visual information, leading to coarse-grained multimodal comprehension. We attribute this deficiency to a suboptimal training paradigm inherent in prevailing VLMs, which exhibits a text-dominant optimization bias by conceptualizing visual signals merely as passive conditional inputs rather than supervisory targets. To mitigate this, we introduce Youtu-VL, a framework leveraging the Vision-Language Unified Autoregressive Supervision (VLUAS) paradigm, which fundamentally shifts the optimization objective from ``vision-as-input'' to ``vision-as-target.'' By integrating visual tokens directly into the prediction stream, Youtu-VL applies unified autoregressive supervision to both visual details and linguistic content. Furthermore, we extend this paradigm to encompass vision-centric tasks, enabling a standard VLM to perform vision-centric tasks without task-specific additions. Extensive empirical evaluations demonstrate that Youtu-VL achieves competitive performance on both general multimodal tasks and vision-centric tasks, establishing a robust foundation for the development of comprehensive generalist visual agents.

Cross-Session Decoding of Neural Spiking Data via Task-Conditioned Latent Alignment

Cross-session nonstationarity in neural activity recorded by implanted electrodes is a major challenge for invasive Brain-computer interfaces (BCIs), as decoders trained on data from one session often fail to generalize to subsequent sessions. This issue is further exacerbated in practice, as retraining or adapting decoders becomes particularly challenging when only limited data are available from a new session. To address this challenge, we propose a Task-Conditioned Latent Alignment framework (TCLA) for cross-session neural decoding. Building upon an autoencoder architecture, TCLA first learns a low-dimensional representation of neural dynamics from a source session with sufficient data. For target sessions with limited data, TCLA then aligns target latent representations to the source in a task-conditioned manner, enabling effective transfer of learned neural dynamics. We evaluate TCLA on the macaque motor and oculomotor center-out dataset. Compared to baseline methods trained solely on target-session data, TCLA consistently improves decoding performance across datasets and decoding settings, with gains in the coefficient of determination of up to 0.386 for y coordinate velocity decoding in a motor dataset. These results suggest that TCLA provides an effective strategy for transferring knowledge from source to target sessions, enabling more robust neural decoding under conditions with limited data.

Continual Learning of Achieving Forgetting-free and Positive Knowledge Transfer

Existing research on continual learning (CL) of a sequence of tasks focuses mainly on dealing with catastrophic forgetting (CF) to balance the learning plasticity of new tasks and the memory stability of old tasks. However, an ideal CL agent should not only be able to overcome CF, but also encourage positive forward and backward knowledge transfer (KT), i.e., using the learned knowledge from previous tasks for the new task learning (namely FKT), and improving the previous tasks' performance with the knowledge of the new task (namely BKT). To this end, this paper first models CL as an optimization problem in which each sequential learning task aims to achieve its optimal performance under the constraint that both FKT and BKT should be positive. It then proposes a novel Enhanced Task Continual Learning (ETCL) method, which achieves forgetting-free and positive KT. Furthermore, the bounds that can lead to negative FKT and BKT are estimated theoretically. Based on the bounds, a new strategy for online task similarity detection is also proposed to facilitate positive KT. To overcome CF, ETCL learns a set of task-specific binary masks to isolate a sparse sub-network for each task while preserving the performance of a dense network for the task. At the beginning of a new task learning, ETCL tries to align the new task's gradient with that of the sub-network of the previous most similar task to ensure positive FKT. By using a new bi-objective optimization strategy and an orthogonal gradient projection method, ETCL updates only the weights of previous similar tasks at the classification layer to achieve positive BKT. Extensive evaluations demonstrate that the proposed ETCL markedly outperforms strong baselines on dissimilar, similar, and mixed task sequences.

Agentic Rubrics as Contextual Verifiers for SWE Agents

Verification is critical for improving agents: it provides the reward signal for Reinforcement Learning and enables inference-time gains through Test-Time Scaling (TTS). Despite its importance, verification in software engineering (SWE) agent settings often relies on code execution, which can be difficult to scale due to environment setup overhead. Scalable alternatives such as patch classifiers and heuristic methods exist, but they are less grounded in codebase context and harder to interpret. To this end, we explore Agentic Rubrics: an expert agent interacts with the repository to create a context-grounded rubric checklist, and candidate patches are then scored against it without requiring test execution. On SWE-Bench Verified under parallel TTS evaluation, Agentic Rubrics achieve a score of 54.2% on Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B and 40.6% on Qwen3-32B, with at least a +3.5 percentage-point gain over the strongest baseline in our comparison set. We further analyze rubric behavior, showing that rubric scores are consistent with ground-truth tests while also flagging issues that tests do not capture. Our ablations show that agentic context gathering is essential for producing codebase-specific, unambiguous criteria. Together, these results suggest that Agentic Rubrics provide an efficient, scalable, and granular verification signal for SWE agents.