External Experience Serving in Production LLM Systems: A Deployment-Oriented Study of Quality-Cost Trade-offs

Production LLM systems accumulate reusable operational experience, but the practical deployment issue is not merely whether such experience can help. It is how different serving strategies trade off quality against online cost under realistic constraints. Injecting external experience can improve task quality, yet it also increases prompt burden, latency, and serving pressure. We study \textit{external experience serving} as a deployment-oriented quality-cost trade-off problem. We evaluate this question in a real production moderation setting, with tool-use and GPQA as supporting contrast tasks that expose different output-cost regimes. We compare no-experience baselines, random experience controls, global prompt injection, and retrieval-based selective injection, and analyze both task quality and serving cost. The results show that, once experience becomes case-dependent, selective retrieval provides a stronger operating point than unconditional global injection. They further show that retrieval quality matters more than simply increasing Top-$K$, and that the same serving policy can exhibit substantially different cost-benefit profiles across short-output and decode-heavy regimes. These findings suggest that external experience is best treated as a selective, cost-aware serving decision rather than as a universal add-on. Overall, in the settings studied here, external experience pays off only when both the serving interface and the task-specific cost structure make its quality gains worth the online cost.

RealClawBench: Live OpenClaw Benchmarks from Real Developer-Agent Sessions

Agent benchmarks should reflect what users actually ask deployed agents to do, yet existing benchmarks often miss key realism properties of real developer-agent sessions. We introduce RealClawBench, a live benchmark framework built from real OpenClaw sessions to capture the distribution, diversity, and real-world difficulty of deployed agent use. Real user requests are challenging to benchmark because they often depend on local execution environments, involve implicit or underspecified intent, and require nontrivial verification. RealClawBench addresses these challenges with two core mechanisms: reconstructed execution environments and deterministic verifiable scorers, which together convert real sessions into reproducible, automatically scored tasks. The resulting release contains 281 executable tasks sampled from a much larger real-session pool while preserving the source distribution, with maximum final-vs-source Jensen-Shannon divergence of 0.0448. Evaluating 14 contemporary models shows that the best system solves only 65.8% of tasks, revealing substantial headroom on realistic developer-agent workloads. By turning real deployed sessions into controlled evaluation instances, RealClawBench provides a practical path toward benchmarks that better measure agent capability in actual use. Code is available at:https://anonymous.4open.science/r/real-claw-bench-582B.

A Primer in Post-Training Reasoning Data: What We Know About How It Works

Post-training has become a primary driver of recent progress in large reasoning models, and reasoning data are often the key variable determining whether this stage succeeds. Work on post-training reasoning data has grown rapidly, yet this literature remains scattered across dataset papers, reinforcement-learning recipes, reward-model studies, benchmarks, and frontier system reports. This paper is the first primer to synthesize over 150 key public studies and system reports on post-training reasoning data. We organize the field around four questions: what data objects exist, what makes them useful, how they are constructed, and how they scale. Together, this organization provides an attribution framework for future reasoning-data releases and post-training recipes.

Harness-Bench: Measuring Harness Effects across Models in Realistic Agent Workflows

LLM agents are increasingly deployed as executable systems that use tools, modify workspaces, and produce concrete artifacts. In such workflows, performance depends not only on the base model, but also on the harness: the system layer that manages context, tools, state, constraints, permissions, tracing, and recovery. However, existing benchmarks typically abstract away execution, compare complete agent systems, or hold the harness fixed, making execution-layer variation difficult to study. We introduce Harness-Bench, a diagnostic benchmark for evaluating configuration-level harness effects in realistic agent workflows. Harness-Bench evaluates representative harness configurations across multiple model backends under shared task environments, budgets, and evaluation protocols, while preserving each harness's native execution behavior. The benchmark contains 106 sandboxed offline tasks constructed from practical agent-use patterns and manually reviewed for realism, solvability, oracle-checkability, and integrity. Each run records final artifacts, execution traces, usage statistics, and validator outputs, enabling analysis beyond final completion. Across 5,194 execution trajectories, we observe substantial variation in completion, process quality, efficiency, and failure behavior across model-harness pairings. These results suggest that agent capability should be reported at the model-harness configuration level rather than attributed to the base model alone. Our analysis further identifies recurring execution-alignment failures, where plausible reasoning becomes decoupled from tool feedback, workspace state, evidence, or verifiable output contracts. Harness-Bench provides a reproducible foundation for diagnosing and improving reliable, efficient, and auditable agent execution stacks.

MemAudit: Post-hoc Auditing of Poisoned Agent Memory via Causal Attribution and Structural Anomaly Detection

Large language model agents increasingly rely on persistent memory to store past interactions, retrieve relevant demonstrations, and improve long-horizon task execution. However, this memory mechanism also creates a practical security vulnerability: an adversarial user may inject malicious records into the agent's memory through ordinary interaction, and these records can later be retrieved to steer the agent's reasoning and actions. Existing defenses primarily focus on online intervention, such as prompt filtering or output blocking, but they do not address the post-hoc question of which stored memories are responsible after harmful behavior has already been observed. We propose \textbf{MemAudit}, a post-hoc causal memory auditing framework for memory-augmented LLM agents. The framework combines two complementary signals: (1) a counterfactual memory influence score that measures each memory's causal contribution to harmful outputs, and (2) a memory consistency graph that identifies structurally anomalous memories within the broader memory store. We evaluate MemAudit against MINJA, a query-only memory injection attack in which malicious records are generated and stored through normal agent interactions rather than direct memory-bank modification. Across both QA and reasoning-agent settings, MemAudit substantially reduces attack success rates under realistic post-hoc auditing scenarios. The results show that QA attack success is reduced from $70\%$ to $0\%$, while RAP attack success drops from $83.3\%$ to $0\%$.

Thinking with Reasoning Skills: Fewer Tokens, More Accuracy

Reasoning LLMs often spend substantial tokens on long intermediate reasoning traces (e.g., chain-of-thought) when solving new problems. We propose to summarize and store reusable reasoning skills distilled from extensive deliberation and trial-and-error exploration, and to retrieve these skills at inference time to guide future reasoning. Unlike the prevailing \emph{reasoning from scratch} paradigm, our approach first recalls relevant skills for each query, helping the model avoid redundant detours and focus on effective solution paths. We evaluate our method on coding and mathematical reasoning tasks, and find that it significantly reduces reasoning tokens while improving overall performance. The resulting lower per-request cost indicates strong practical and economic potential for real-world deployment.

Beyond Parameter Arithmetic: Sparse Complementary Fusion for Distribution-Aware Model Merging

Model merging has emerged as a promising paradigm for composing the capabilities of large language models by directly operating in weight space, enabling the integration of specialized models without costly retraining. However, existing merging methods largely rely on parameter-space heuristics, which often introduce severe interference, leading to degraded generalization and unstable generation behaviors such as repetition and incoherent outputs. In this work, we propose Sparse Complementary Fusion with reverse KL (SCF-RKL), a novel model merging framework that explicitly controls functional interference through sparse, distribution-aware updates. Instead of assuming linear additivity in parameter space, SCF-RKL measures the functional divergence between models using reverse Kullback-Leibler divergence and selectively incorporates complementary parameters. This mode-seeking, sparsity-inducing design effectively preserves stable representations while integrating new capabilities. We evaluate SCF-RKL across a wide range of model scales and architectures, covering both reasoning-focused and instruction-tuned models. Extensive experiments on 24 benchmarks spanning advanced reasoning, general reasoning and knowledge, instruction following, and safety demonstrate, vision classification that SCF-RKL consistently outperforms existing model merging methods while maintaining strong generalization and generation stability.

Beyond Static Alignment: Hierarchical Policy Control for LLM Safety via Risk-Aware Chain-of-Thought

Large Language Models (LLMs) face a fundamental safety-helpfulness trade-off due to static, one-size-fits-all safety policies that lack runtime controllabilityxf, making it difficult to tailor responses to diverse application needs. %As a result, models may over-refuse benign requests or under-constrain harmful ones. We present \textbf{PACT} (Prompt-configured Action via Chain-of-Thought), a framework for dynamic safety control through explicit, risk-aware reasoning. PACT operates under a hierarchical policy architecture: a non-overridable global safety policy establishes immutable boundaries for critical risks (e.g., child safety, violent extremism), while user-defined policies can introduce domain-specific (non-global) risk categories and specify label-to-action behaviors to improve utility in real-world deployment settings. The framework decomposes safety decisions into structured Classify$\rightarrow$Act paths that route queries to the appropriate action (comply, guide, or reject) and render the decision-making process transparent. Extensive experiments demonstrate that PACT achieves near state-of-the-art safety performance under global policy evaluation while attaining the best controllability under user-specific policy evaluation, effectively mitigating the safety-helpfulness trade-off. We will release the PACT model suite, training data, and evaluation protocols to facilitate reproducible research in controllable safety alignment.

FABLE: Forest-Based Adaptive Bi-Path LLM-Enhanced Retrieval for Multi-Document Reasoning

The rapid expansion of long-context Large Language Models (LLMs) has reignited debate on whether Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) remains necessary. However, empirical evidence reveals persistent limitations of long-context inference, including the lost-in-the-middle phenomenon, high computational cost, and poor scalability for multi-document reasoning. Conversely, traditional RAG systems, while efficient, are constrained by flat chunk-level retrieval that introduces semantic noise and fails to support structured cross-document synthesis. We present \textbf{FABLE}, a \textbf{F}orest-based \textbf{A}daptive \textbf{B}i-path \textbf{L}LM-\textbf{E}nhanced retrieval framework that integrates LLMs into both knowledge organization and retrieval. FABLE constructs LLM-enhanced hierarchical forest indexes with multi-granularity semantic structures, then employs a bi-path strategy combining LLM-guided hierarchical traversal with structure-aware propagation for fine-grained evidence acquisition, with explicit budget control for adaptive efficiency trade-offs. Extensive experiments demonstrate that FABLE consistently outperforms SOTA RAG methods and achieves comparable accuracy to full-context LLM inference with up to 94\% token reduction, showing that long-context LLMs amplify rather than fully replace the need for structured retrieval.

TriPlay-RL: Tri-Role Self-Play Reinforcement Learning for LLM Safety Alignment

In recent years, safety risks associated with large language models have become increasingly prominent, highlighting the urgent need to mitigate the generation of toxic and harmful content. The mainstream paradigm for LLM safety alignment typically adopts a collaborative framework involving three roles: an attacker for adversarial prompt generation, a defender for safety defense, and an evaluator for response assessment. In this paper, we propose a closed-loop reinforcement learning framework called TriPlay-RL that enables iterative and co-improving collaboration among three roles with near-zero manual annotation. Experimental results show that the attacker preserves high output diversity while achieving a 20%-50% improvement in adversarial effectiveness; the defender attains 10%-30% gains in safety performance without degrading general reasoning capability; and the evaluator continuously refines its fine-grained judgment ability through iterations, accurately distinguishing unsafe responses, simple refusals, and useful guidance. Overall, our framework establishes an efficient and scalable paradigm for LLM safety alignment, enabling continuous co-evolution within a unified learning loop.