Large Language Model (LLM) Agents exhibit inherent reasoning abilities through the collaboration of multiple tools.However, during agent inference, existing methods often suffer from (i) locally myopic generation, due to the absence of lookahead, and (ii) trajectory instability, where minor early errors can escalate into divergent reasoning paths. These issues make it difficult to balance global effectiveness and computational efficiency. To address these two issues, we propose meta-adaptive exploration with LLM agents (MAXS)[https://github.com/exoskeletonzj/MAXS], a meta-adaptive reasoning framework based on LLM Agents that flexibly integrates tool execution and reasoning planning. MAXS employs a lookahead strategy to extend reasoning paths a few steps ahead, estimating the advantage value of tool usage, and combines step consistency variance and inter-step trend slopes to jointly select stable, consistent, and high-value reasoning steps. Additionally, we introduce a trajectory convergence mechanism that controls computational cost by halting further rollouts once path consistency is achieved, enabling a balance between resource efficiency and global effectiveness in multi-tool reasoning. We conduct extensive empirical studies across three base models (MiMo-VL-7B, Qwen2.5-VL-7B, Qwen2.5-VL-32B) and five datasets, demonstrating that MAXS consistently outperforms existing methods in both performance and inference efficiency. Further analysis confirms the effectiveness of our lookahead strategy and tool usage.

With the rapid advancement of large language models (LLMs), automated code generation has made remarkable progress. Recent studies explore multi-agent collaboration and adopt planning–coding–debugging workflows to enhance performance. However, these approaches are constrained by rigid, predefined workflows that fail to flexibly adjust their plans and lack effective verification of intermediate reasoning steps. In this work, we propose MavenCoder, a model-adaptive and verification–enhanced framework for competition-level code generation. MavenCoder leverages adaptive assessment aligned with the model’s capabilities to select planning strategies, while providing timely feedback and correction via multi-perspective verification. This adaptive problem-solving paradigm mitigates earlier limitations by enabling flexible planning and timely error correction. Compared with existing state-of-the-art approaches, MavenCoder achieves superior pass@1 results across multiple benchmarks, achieving 87.5% on LiveCodeBench, 93.9% on HumanEval+, 81.7% on MBPP+, and 46.1% on CodeContests, outperforming recent agent-based systems with improvement exceeding 3%–40%.

While Large Language Models (LLMs) exhibit strong semantic capabilities, their resilience to manipulative linguistic patterns such as logical fallacies remains an underexplored area. Prior work has focused on the ability of LLMs to identify or classify fallacies, but their robustness against these fallacies in persuasive contexts remains largely unexplored.To address this gap, we introduce LoFa (Logical Fallacy), a comprehensive benchmark to evaluate LLM robustness against fallacies. We first construct the LoFa dataset via a multi-agent pipeline, pairing factual questions with fallacious arguments. Then, we develop a multi-round debate framework to assess model resilience under sustained attacks.Furthermore, to disentangle robustness from a model’s inherent knowledge limitations, we propose a new metric, LFR@k (Logical Fallacy Resistance), to quantify performance. Our experiments reveal that different LLMs exhibit varied robustness to distinct types of fallacies, highlighting unique vulnerability profiles across models.

Knowledge editing emerges as a promising approach for updating target knowledge in Large Language Models (LLMs) in a timely manner, thereby preventing undesirable behaviors stemming from outdated, inaccurate, or incomplete knowledge. However, existing methods mainly focus on instance-level editing, which is prone to over-editing risk featuring knowledge degradation and general ability deterioration, due to redundant instance-specific modifications for knowledge. To mitigate the over-editing risk, we explore the rule-level editing problem that avoids case-by-case modification by generalizing rule-level knowledge to update rule-derived instances. We further construct a benchmark called RuleEdit for systematic evaluation on rule-level editing. Moreover, we propose a Rule-Transfer Editing (RTE) method to facilitate effective updates and generalizations of rule-level knowledge in LLMs. Experimental results highlight our significant improvements, with the enhancements of 28.1% in portability and 8.1% in average performance over the best-performing baselines for LLaMA-2-7B on RULE_mix.