The Optimizer Is the Agent: Reasoning-Driven Search across Prompts, Programs, and ML Workflows

Recent systems for optimizing prompts, programs, and ML workflows typically rely on explicit outer-loop controllers such as evolutionary search, bandits, or textual-gradient methods. We ask a fundamentally different question: how much of this search policy can be internalized by a single tool-using agent? We present ReASearch, a unified framework for reasoning-driven optimization in which the agent autonomously decides what to evaluate, how to diagnose failures, which edits to make, and when to verify or restart. Rather than serving only as a proposal generator guided by hand-designed heuristics, the agent actively analyzes outcomes, allocates budget, and refines its strategy over long horizons through persistent memory. With a shared agent loop and domain-specific tools, ReASearch instantiates the exact same scaffold to optimize prompts, programs, and ML workflows. Across 14 diverse tasks, it is competitive with and mostly better than specialized optimization systems, achieving gains of 2% to 40% over strong domain-specific baselines, and in some cases discovering solutions that improve on prior human best-known results. Crucially, we observe that complex search behaviors, which are typically implemented by explicit controllers, emerge naturally from the agent's reasoning process.

Can Induced Emotion Bias LLM Behaviors in Sequential Decision Making?

As Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed as autonomous agents in high-stakes domains, understanding contextual factors that may modulate their decision-making becomes critical. While LLMs are trained to perceive and resonate with users' emotions, it remains unclear whether induced emotion can influence their sequential decision-making. We investigate this question using the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT), a classic psychological paradigm for studying decision-making under uncertainty, combined with an imagination-based emotion induction procedure. We first validate the feasibility of this paradigm by confirming that LLMs can sense strong, distinguishable emotions from context and that LLM agents can learn from sequential interactions in a human-like pace. With the validated setup, we find that, different from humans, induced emotion does not significantly bias the decision dynamics of LLM agents on average. However, the effects of anger are conditioned: inducing anger makes LLM agents less sensitive to penalties for bad decisions, and in early stages of the game, anger can lower exploration, locking decisions into a few choices early. These findings reveal the subtle yet distinct effects of induced emotion on LLM decision-making compared to human behavior, and provide a tool for future research on affective modulation of LLM agents.

OpenLongTail: Generative Scaling of Long-Tail Driving Data

Scaling robust driving policies is fundamentally bottlenecked by the scarcity of edge cases in curated datasets. While the real world continuously captures these critical events, such long-tail events remain underutilized when collected from heterogeneous sources. Specifically, diverse but valuable in-the-wild long-tail videos lack the full view coverage required for training policy models, often missing multi-view poses or originating solely from monocular dash cameras. This modality gap prevents these ubiquitous observations from being converted into scalable training data for long-tail generalization. We introduce OpenLongTail, an open-source generative data engine for scaling autonomous driving policies under long-tail events. To transform heterogeneous data sources into view-aligned and temporally coherent multi-view assets that are useful for policy learning, we develop a pose-informed extrapolative view synthesis pipeline that generates the missing views. We further enhance cross-view consistency and the temporal alignment for the newly generated views by injecting Plücker ray geometry into the scalable generation engine. By synthesizing heterogeneous long-tail data, we observe a significant improvement in closed-loop driving robustness in handling long-tail events. By measuring the extrapolative view synthesis and pose metrics, we validate the effectiveness of OpenLongTail in visual fidelity, cross-view consistency, and ego-trajectory recovery.

POPS: Recovering Unlearned Multi-Modality Knowledge in MLLMs with Prompt-Optimized Parameter Shaking

Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) have demonstrated impressive performance on cross-modal tasks by jointly training on large-scale textual and visual data, where privacy-sensitive examples could be unintentionally encoded, raising concerns about privacy or copyright violation. To this end, Multi-modality Machine Unlearning (MMU) was proposed as a mitigation that can effectively force MLLMs to forget private information. However, the robustness of such unlearning methods is not fully exploited when the model is published and accessible to malicious users. In this paper, we propose a novel adversarial strategy, namely Prompt-Optimized Parameter Shaking (POPS), aiming to recover the supposedly unlearned multi-modality knowledge from the MLLMs. Our method elicits the victim MLLMs to generate potential private examples via prompt-suffix optimization, and then exploits these synthesized outputs to fine-tune the models so they disclose the true private information. The experiments on the different MMU benchmarks reveal substantial weaknesses in the existing MMU algorithms. Our POPS can even achieve a near-complete recovery of supposedly erased sensitive information on the unlearned MLLMs, exposing fundamental vulnerabilities that challenge the foundational robustness of representative MMU-based privacy protections.

Fund2Persona: A Framework for Building and Refining Financial Advisor Personas from Fund Disclosure Data

Demand for personalized financial advising is growing, but consistent advisor expertise is difficult to obtain, scale, and encode in LLM systems. Simple persona prompts rarely specify how a financial advisor should reason and often drift toward generic recommendations. We propose Fund2Persona, a framework that grounds financial-advisor personas in fund disclosures, holdings transitions, market context, and manager commentary, then refines them through an agentic actor--scorer--patcher loop. We evaluate the resulting personas on held-out holdings-transition reconstruction and manager-commentary alignment, where they better recover portfolio decisions and grounded manager interpretation than generic baselines. We further study two downstream diagnostics: market-scenario generation, where persona retrieval broadens plausible investment views beyond repeated generic rollouts, and advisory dialogues grounded in investor profiles, where matched personas give more specific and useful advice than a generic advisor. These results suggest that fund-data-grounded financial-advisor personas can make manager-specific investment expertise portable rather than merely changing an LLM's surface style.

When Summaries Distort Decisions: Information Fidelity in LLM-Compressed Financial Analysis

Financial decision-makers face more information than they can directly inspect, making context compression necessary. Yet when large language models (LLMs) compress financial source material, they can alter the investment judgment supported by the original source. We frame this problem as information fidelity: compression loses fidelity when it changes the decision induced by the source. In agentic systems, such losses may recur across intermediate steps and amplify throughout the decision process. Across financial filings and earnings-call transcripts, we find that LLM-based compression can produce fluent and factually plausible compressed contexts that nevertheless alter downstream decisions. We analyze two diagnostic patterns associated with fidelity loss: decontextualization, where salient evidence is retained but separated from the caveats and contextual qualifiers needed for correct interpretation, and model dependency, where different compressors expose different views of the same source. We then propose Agentic Context Compression, which generates multiple candidate compressions and audits their disagreements against the original source. Our results suggest that financial compression should be evaluated not only by efficiency or factuality, but also by its ability to preserve decision-relevant context.

A Physics-Grounded Benchmark for Multi-Agent Dynamics in World Models

Generative world models hold immense promise as scalable simulators for autonomous systems, particularly for synthesizing rare but safety-critical multi-agent interactions, such as vehicle collisions. However, current evaluation paradigms index heavily on visual fidelity and semantic alignment, leaving a critical blind spot: they cannot reliably quantify whether generated dynamics actually obey the fundamental physical laws required for reliable simulation. Assessing this physical plausibility is inherently difficult due to a lack of physical metrics and the challenge of extracting metric-scale kinematics from uncalibrated video rollouts. To bridge this gap, we introduce CrashTwin, a physics-grounded evaluation framework designed to stress-test the physical trustworthiness of world models. CrashTwin couples a diverse dataset of multi-agent collision scenarios, comprising 25K controllable synthetic and 12K in-the-wild real-world collision sequences with a novel calibration-free reconstruction pipeline, enabling the recovery of 3D physical attributes directly from world model rollouts. We propose a diagnostic suite that systematically evaluates three dimensions: spatio-temporal consistency, momentum and kinetic energy conservation, and world-dynamics integrity. Extensive benchmarking of state-of-the-art models reveals a crucial insight: high perceptual quality frequently masks severe physical violations during complex interactions. By quantitatively exposing these failure modes, CrashTwin provides a vital diagnostic tool for developing physically grounded world models capable of reliable real-world simulation.

No Hidden Prompts Needed! You Can Game AI Peer Review with Presentation-Only Revisions

As AI-generated reviews move from experimental tools into peer-review infrastructure, most robustness concerns have focused on explicit attacks such as hidden instructions and prompt injection. We study a harder and more policy-relevant failure mode: no hidden text, no prompt injection, and no changes to methods, experiments, figures, equations, proofs, or numerical results. The attacker modifies only presentation-level content, such as the abstract, contribution framing, related work, discussion, and narrative structure. We introduce adversarial repackaging: a closed-loop attack that uses AI-reviewer feedback to search for presentation-level revisions while keeping the scientific evidence fixed. Across three mainstream AI reviewers, adversarial repackaging achieves a 75.1% attack success rate and a mean score gain of +1.21/10. The effect is not explained by ordinary prose polishing. We also reveal that strategies that change how the reviewer interprets the paper, such as related-work repositioning and analytical discussion expansion, substantially outperform surface edits such as local polishing, table formatting, and algorithm boxes. Our analysis reveals two deeper structural failure modes. First, AI reviewers are easier to impress than to convince: highlighting strengths reliably increases perceived merit, while attempts to dissolve weaknesses frequently backfire. Second, AI reviewers can confuse the appearance of addressing a limitation with actually resolving it, allowing unchanged evidence to be reinterpreted as stronger scientific contribution. These results show that the deployment risk is not only malicious hidden instructions, but the emergence of paper presentation itself as an optimization surface. We release a contamination-free rolling benchmark and attack framework for testing whether AI reviewers remain anchored to scientific content under presentation-only edits.

What Objects Enable, Not What They Are: Functional Latent Spaces for Affordance Reasoning

Existing robot planning systems rely on appearance-based reasoning, where visual observations are encoded into latent spaces organized around object appearances (e.g., recognizing a "cart" based on how it looks). However, planning requires reasoning about task-relevant functionalities of objects (e.g., whether an object is "movable"), which appearance-based latent spaces do not capture. As a result, existing approaches struggle to generalize to novel robot-object interactions. We address this limited generalizability through affordance reasoning, enabling planning based on task-relevant object functionalities instead of appearance alone. We introduce A4D, which maps visual observations into a shared latent space structured around affordances (e.g., "movable"). By projecting visual observations into this functional latent space and measuring their proximity to affordances, A4D infers functionalities relevant to the observed object. Furthermore, we introduce an affordance discovery mechanism that expands the latent space to handle unseen scenarios where existing affordances are insufficient. A4D uses proximity in the functional latent space to quantify uncertainty in affordance inference and selectively triggers affordance discovery. We evaluate A4D across several planning tasks involving diverse and unseen affordances. A4D achieves 94% inference accuracy on existing affordances outperforming state-of-the-art approaches by over 15% points, improves new-affordance inference accuracy from 70% to over 90% with fewer than 10% of the original training data, and enables 100x faster inference. Code, videos, and data available at: https://A4Dance-reasoning.github.io.

VASO: Formally Verifiable Self-Evolving Skills for Physical AI Agents

Reusable robot skills are becoming the basic units through which embodied agents turn open-ended instructions into long-horizon physical behavior. We argue that, while foundation models have collapsed the cost of creating these skills, the cost of trusting them has not. Existing skill-evolution loops refine skills through execution feedback, unit tests, environment reward, or LLM self-critique, but these signals provide only trace-level evidence: they show that a skill worked on sampled executions, not that skill-induced plans satisfy temporal safety contracts under untested conditions. We introduce VASO, a framework for verification-guided self-evolution of LLM-generated robot skill contracts. In VASO, each skill is represented as a semantic contract with two coupled interfaces: a formal interface that aligns robot states, observations, and control commands with logical propositions for model checking, and a planner-facing interface that guides executable behavior generation. A model checker first filters logically inconsistent skill contracts, then verifies plans induced by the skill against global and local temporal specifications. When verification fails, VASO translates the counterexample trace into a textual gradient that updates the reusable skill contract while keeping foundation-model weights frozen. On Clearpath Jackal and PX4 quadcopter tasks, VASO reaches 97.2% formal-specification compliance using fewer than 100 optimization samples, outperforming execution-feedback, prompt-optimization, and fine-tuning baselines. To our knowledge, VASO is the first framework that closes the loop between formal verification and self-evolving LLM-generated skills for physical AI agents: formal counterexamples become optimization feedback for reusable robot skill contracts, rather than merely verifying one-off plans, tuning planner prompts, or fine-tuning model weights.