ScrambleToolBench: Agents Search Exhaustively Even When Their Own Map Points to the Next Step

To operate robustly in open-world environments, autonomous agents should be able to infer the behavior of unfamiliar systems through interaction alone, even in the absence of documentation. However, existing tool-use benchmarks expose semantic tool schemas in static environments, allowing agents to rely on prior knowledge rather than autonomous discovery. To address this limitation, we introduce ScrambleToolBench, an interactive terminal benchmark designed to isolate behavioral reasoning. By removing semantic cues and enforcing a continuous task curriculum, the benchmark requires agents to uncover hidden tool behaviors entirely through trial-and-error interaction. The benchmark further introduces dynamic challenges, including mapping drift, stochastic action failures, and temporal execution windows, to evaluate whether agents can revise and adapt their hypotheses as the environment changes. Our evaluation of state-of-the-art language models reveals that successful initial discovery does not translate into robust adaptation. When faced with structural changes such as mapping drift, agents fail to use deductive strategies such as cycle tracing, and instead exhibit belief inertia or fall back to exhaustive search. Increasing test-time reasoning only amplifies this expensive brute-force search rather than enabling deductive recovery. While equipping agents with persistent memory reduces compounding errors, they remain unable to efficiently infer structural changes, highlighting a gap in current agent reasoning.

$Σ$-Mem: An Online Reliability Memory for LLM-based Multi-Agent Systems

Memory is central to long-horizon LLM agents, yet existing memory systems primarily preserve interaction content rather than modeling which agents can be trusted and under what conditions. This limitation is particularly important in multi-agent systems, where a central model may be unable to directly verify plausible or correlated peer responses. We introduce $Σ$-Mem, an online reliability memory that records historical competence evidence for individual peers and peer relationship evidence across the peer set. Both forms of evidence are maintained as real symmetric states and updated from post-decision correctness feedback. By Weyl's inequality, the spectral change caused by each event-level update is bounded, enabling stable online adaptation without retraining the underlying models. $Σ$-Mem provides a general write-and-read interface: the same memory can be used for residual steering of a central model, response-free peer routing, or reliability-weighted voting. Across five Qwen-family models, $Σ$-Mem adapts to counterfactual reliability shifts and generalizes to unseen peers and task domains. Direct memory readouts also outperform majority voting and the best fixed peer over the full OOD evaluation set. Moreover, performance improves consistently as more correctness feedback becomes available, indicating that $Σ$-Mem progressively accumulates actionable reliability information. These results establish reliability memory as a reusable foundation for adaptive coordination in LLM-based multi-agent systems.

IDEAgent: Agentic Quality-Diversity Search for Research Idea Generation

Large Language Models (LLMs) have significantly automated the process of scientific discovery over the past few years. However, existing systems share one core limitation: they generate and optimize ideas independently for either Quality or Diversity. This often leads to the generation of ideas in close proximity to one another or to a large set of trivial, unsound, or unclear concepts. In this work, we instead argue that research ideation should be treated as a conjunction of both objectives and framed as a Quality-Diversity (QD) search. In line with this perspective, we introduce IDEAgent, a multi-agent framework that manages the evolution of ideas through lineages. We jointly drive Quality using multi-objective feedback for dedicated repair and refinement, while Diversity is achieved through lightweight sequential memory and explicit comparison against completed ideas, their historical ancestors, and rejected proposals. To systematically evaluate this QD conjunction, we develop Yield, a joint metric that computes the largest set of mutually diverse ideas that satisfy a predetermined quality threshold. Finally, through evaluations across 32 topics spanning 8 domains of Computer Science, we show that IDEAgent outperforms the best baseline by 3.89x on Yield, while achieving non-zero Yield on 8x more topics. We further corroborate these findings through an analysis of quality improvements, showing that repair and refinement are crucial for building logical rigor and clarity while preserving non-obviousness. To encourage future research on QD-search-based ideation, we open-source IDEAgent at https://github.com/declare-lab/IDEAgent.

On the Limits of LLM-as-Judge for Scientific Novelty Assessment

LLMs are increasingly used to generate and judge scientific ideas. This makes novelty evaluation a central problem. Full idea evaluation is difficult because it often requires judging a method, its feasibility, and its empirical promise. We therefore study a cleaner upstream object: the research question (RQ). RQ generation is a prerequisite for scientific ideation, and RQs can be compared against questions pursued in real papers. We introduce RQ-Bench, a benchmark built from recent arXiv papers. For each paper, we reconstruct author-anchored RQs from its cited background, gaps, and contributions. These RQs are not the only valid questions for the same background. They are author-anchored reference points for testing novelty judgments. We evaluate model-generated RQs with standalone LLM judging, comparative LLM judging, and human expert evaluation. LLM judges consistently rate model-generated RQs as highly novel, producing a novelty mirage; in comparative evaluations, this preference becomes even stronger. Domain experts, however, reach the opposite conclusion and prefer the author-anchored reference questions. We further find that many generated RQs are narrow or source-bound, a dimension that LLM judges often miss unless explicitly tested. Overall, the contradictory novelty evaluations between LLM judges and human experts raise a serious concern about the reliability of using LLMs to assess the scientific novelty of research questions.

GRAIL: Gradient-Reweighted Advantages for Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards

Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (e.g. GRPO) is now a common way to improve mathematical reasoning in Large Language Models (LLMs). However, current methods usually broadcast one sequence-level advantage to all tokens, or use costly process reward models (PRMs) for step-level supervision. Uniform advantage distribution assumes that all tokens contribute equally to the final reward. This dilutes the gradient signal, since flawed reasoning steps and filler words are updated as strongly as valid logical inferences. To address this, we introduce Gradient-Reweighted Advantage (GRAIL), an intrinsic token-wise advantage reweighting method. GRAIL uses gradient-activation saliency to place more weight on tokens that are more locally sensitive to the final answer. Evaluations across five models from the Qwen3, R1-distilled and OctoThinker families show that GRAIL consistently outperforms GRPO. GRAIL achieved an average improvement of 3.60% in accuracy and 3.05% in Pass@3, demonstrating that fine-grained reasoning alignment can be achieved without process-level supervision.

Beyond What to Select: A Plug-and-play Oscillatory Data-Volume Scheduling for Efficient Model Training

Data selection accelerates training by identifying representative training data while preserving model performance. However, existing methods mainly focus on designing sample-importance criteria, i.e., deciding what to select, while typically fixing the selected data volume as the target ratio throughout training. Thus, they are often dynamic in sample identity but static in data volume. In this work, we revisit data selection from an optimization perspective and show that selected-data training induces an implicit regularization effect modulated by the instantaneous selection ratio. This reveals a key trade-off: lower ratios amplify selection-induced regularization, whereas higher ratios preserve data coverage and optimization fidelity. Motivated by this insight, we propose PODS, a Plug-and-play Oscillatory Data-volume Scheduling framework. Rather than introducing another sample-scoring metric, PODS serves as a lightweight module that dynamically schedules how much data to select over training. Under the target selection ratio, PODS alternates between low-ratio regularization phases and high-ratio recovery phases to exploit selection-induced regularization without sacrificing optimization stability. With its lightweight, ratio-level, and task-agnostic design, PODS is compatible with existing static and dynamic selection methods and broadly applicable across training paradigms. Experiments across various datasets, architectures, and tasks show that PODS consistently improves the efficiency-generalization trade-off, e.g., reducing ImageNet-1k training cost by 50% with improved accuracy and accelerating LLM instruction tuning by over 2x without performance degradation.

$δ$-mem: Efficient Online Memory for Large Language Models

Large language models increasingly need to accumulate and reuse historical information in long-term assistants and agent systems. Simply expanding the context window is costly and often fails to ensure effective context utilization. We propose $δ$-mem, a lightweight memory mechanism that augments a frozen full-attention backbone with a compact online state of associative memory. $δ$-mem compresses past information into a fixed-size state matrix updated by delta-rule learning, and uses its readout to generate low-rank corrections to the backbone's attention computation during generation. With only an $8\times8$ online memory state, $δ$-mem improves the average score to $1.10\times$ that of the frozen backbone and $1.15\times$ that of the strongest non-$δ$-mem memory baseline. It achieves larger gains on memory-heavy benchmarks, reaching $1.31\times$ on MemoryAgentBench and $1.20\times$ on LoCoMo, while largely preserving general capabilities. These results show that effective memory can be realized through a compact online state directly coupled with attention computation, without full fine-tuning, backbone replacement, or explicit context extension.

Post Reasoning: Improving the Performance of Non-Thinking Models at No Cost

As the widespread adoption of Large Language Models (LLMs) accelerates, token consumption from intermediate reasoning traces increasingly contributes to inference latency and operational cost. Recent studies suggest that many real-world tasks require little to no explicit reasoning, with additional reasoning sometimes even degrading performance. In this work, we propose \textbf{Post-Reasoning}, a simple yet effective approach that improves instruction-tuned models by conditioning them to justify their answers after generating the final response. By design, it enables the final answer to be obtained without additional latency or token cost, while still improving performance through simple instruction augmentation. We evaluate Post-Reasoning across \(117\) model--benchmark settings spanning \(13\) open and proprietary models, \(4\) model families, and \(9\) diverse reasoning and knowledge-intensive benchmarks, including AMC, HMMT, GSM8K, GPQA, MMLU-Pro, and BIG-Bench Hard. Post-Reasoning improves performance in over \(88.19\%\) of evaluated settings, achieving a mean relative improvements of \(17.37\%\). Furthermore, we propose supervised post-reason tuning, which further improves performance in over \(91.11\%\) of evaluated settings, and exceeds the prompt-based post-reasoning baseline by an average of \(8.01\%\), demonstrating that post-reasoning can be effectively internalized through training. Ultimately, Post-Reasoning establishes a new performance ceiling for direct-answer capabilities.

Chain-of-Glimpse: Search-Guided Progressive Object-Grounded Reasoning for Video Understanding

Video understanding requires identifying and reasoning over semantically discriminative visual objects across frames, yet existing object-agnostic solutions struggle to effectively handle substantial object variations over time. To address this, we introduce Chain-of-Glimpse, a search-guided progressive object-grounded reasoning framework that explicitly anchors each reasoning step to specific visual evidence regions, enabling compositional and multi-step decision-making. Formally, Chain-of-Glimpse formulates video reasoning as a step-by-step process that incrementally builds spatially grounded traces around task-relevant visual objects, thereby mitigating over-reliance on saliency-driven cues. Specifically, Chain-of-Glimpse features a search-guided controller, optimized via reinforcement learning with a format reward that significantly incentivizes grounding capability, to iteratively ground visual evidence regions and form reliable reasoning trajectories, yielding accurate and interpretable multi-step decisions. Extensive evaluations on both in domain NExTQA and out-of-domain Video-Holmes, CG-Bench Reasoning, and VRBench benchmarks demonstrate consistent performance gains, robustness and generalization of Chain-of-Glimpse across diverse video reasoning tasks.

From Perception to Action: An Interactive Benchmark for Vision Reasoning

Understanding the physical structure is essential for real-world applications such as embodied agents, interactive design, and long-horizon manipulation. Yet, prevailing Vision-Language Model (VLM) evaluations still center on structure-agnostic, single-turn setups (e.g., VQA), which fail to assess agents' ability to reason about how geometry, contact, and support relations jointly constrain what actions are possible in a dynamic environment. To address this gap, we introduce the Causal Hierarchy of Actions and Interactions (CHAIN) benchmark, an interactive 3D, physics-driven testbed designed to evaluate whether models can understand, plan, and execute structured action sequences grounded in physical constraints. CHAIN shifts evaluation from passive perception to active problem solving, spanning tasks such as interlocking mechanical puzzles and 3D stacking and packing. We conduct a comprehensive study of state-of-the-art VLMs and diffusion-based models under unified interactive settings. Our results show that top-performing models still struggle to internalize physical structure and causal constraints, often failing to produce reliable long-horizon plans and cannot robustly translate perceived structure into effective actions. The project is available at https://social-ai-studio.github.io/CHAIN/.