Session history is a common way of recording user interacting behaviors throughout a browsing activity with multiple products. For example, if an user clicks a product webpage and then leaves, it might because there are certain features that don’t satisfy the user, which serve as an important indicator of on-the-spot user preferences. However, all prior works fail to capture and model customer intention effectively because insufficient information exploitation and only apparent information like descriptions and titles are used. There is also a lack of data and corresponding benchmark for explicitly modeling intention in E-commerce product purchase sessions. To address these issues, we introduce the concept of an intention tree and propose a dataset curation pipeline. Together, we construct a sibling multimodal benchmark, SessionIntentBench, that evaluates L(V)LMs’ capability on understanding inter-session intention shift with four subtasks. With 1,952,177 intention entries, 1,132,145 session intention trajectories, and 13,003,664 available tasks mined using 10,905 sessions, we provide a scalable way to exploit the existing session data for customer intention understanding. We conduct human annotations to collect ground-truth label for a subset of collected data to form an evaluation gold set. Extensive experiments on the annotated data further confirm that current L(V)LMs fail to capture and utilize the intention across the complex session setting. Further analysis show injecting intention enhances LLMs’ performances.

Large language models (LLMs) augmented with multi-step reasoning and action generation abilities have shown promise in leveraging external tools to tackle complex tasks that require long-horizon planning. However, existing approaches either rely on implicit planning in the reasoning stage or introduce explicit planners without systematically addressing how to optimize the planning stage. As evidence, we observe that under vanilla reinforcement learning (RL), planning tokens exhibit significantly higher entropy than other action tokens, revealing uncertain decision points that remain under-optimized. To address this, we introduce DeepPlanner, an end-to-end RL framework that effectively enhances the planning capabilities of deep research agents. Our approach shapes token-level advantage with an entropy-based term to allocate larger updates to high entropy tokens, and selectively upweights sample-level advantages for planning-intensive rollouts. Extensive experiments across seven deep research benchmarks demonstrate that DeepPlanner improves planning quality and achieves state-of-the-art results under a substantially lower training budget.

Personalized large language models (LLMs) tailor content to individual preferences using user profiles or histories. However, existing parameter-efficient fine-tuning (PEFT) methods, such as the “One-PEFT-Per-User” (OPPU) paradigm, require training a separate adapter for each user, making them computationally expensive and impractical for real-time updates. We introduce Profile-to-PEFT, a scalable framework that employs a hypernetwork, trained end-to-end, to map a user’s encoded profile directly to a full set of adapter parameters (e.g., LoRA), eliminating per-user training at deployment. This design enables instant adaptation, generalization to unseen users, and privacy-preserving local deployment. Experimental results demonstrate that our method outperforms both prompt-based personalization and OPPU while using substantially fewer computational resources at deployment. The framework exhibits strong generalization to out-of-distribution users and maintains robustness across varying user activity levels and different embedding backbones. The proposed Profile-to-PEFT framework enables efficient, scalable, and adaptive LLM personalization suitable for large-scale applications.

The instruction hierarchy, which establishes a priority order from system messages to user messages, conversation history, and tool outputs, is essential for ensuring consistent and safe behavior in language models (LMs). Despite its importance, this topic receives limited attention, and there is a lack of comprehensive benchmarks for evaluating models’ ability to follow the instruction hierarchy. We bridge this gap by introducing IHEval, a novel benchmark comprising 3,538 examples across nine tasks, covering cases where instructions in different priorities either align or conflict. Our evaluation of popular LMs highlights their struggle to recognize instruction priorities. All evaluated models experience a sharp performance decline when facing conflicting instructions, compared to their original instruction-following performance. Moreover, the most competitive open-source model only achieves 48% accuracy in resolving such conflicts. Our results underscore the need for targeted optimization in the future development of LMs.

Although large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated outperforming human experts in medical examinations, it remains challenging to adopt LLMs in real-world clinical decision-making that typically involves multi-hop medical reasoning. Common practices include prompting commercial LLMs and fine-tuning LLMs on medical data. However, in the clinical domain, using commercial LLMs raises privacy concerns regarding sensitive patient data. Fine-tuning competitive medical LLMs for different tasks usually requires extensive data and computing resources, which are difficult to acquire, especially in medical institutions with limited infrastructure. We propose DrAgent, which can build LLMs as agents to deliver accurate medical decision-making and reasoning. In implementation, we take a lightweight LLM as the backbone to collaborate with diverse clinical tools. To make efficient use of data, DrAgent introduces recursive curriculum learning to optimize the LLM in an easy-to-hard progression. The results show that our approach achieves competitive performance on diverse datasets.

Despite of significant achievements in improving instruction-following capabilities of large language models (LLMs), the ability to process multiple potentially entangled or conflict instructions remains a considerable challenge. Real-world scenarios often require the consistency across multiple instructions over time, such as secret privacy, presonal preferences, and prioritization, so we demand sophisticated abilities to integrate multiple turns and carefully balance competing objectives when instructions intersect or conflict. This work presents a systematic investigation of LLMs’ capabilities in handling multiple turns of instructions, covering three levels of difficulty: (1) retrieving information from instructions, (2) tracking and reasoning across turns, and (3) resolving conflicts among instructions. We construct MultiTurnInstruct with 1.1K high-quality multi-turn conversations through the human-in-the-loop approach and result in a total of nine capability categories, including statics and dynamics, reasoning and multitasking. Our finding reveals an intriguing trade-off between different capabilities. While GPT models demonstrate superior memorization, they show reduced effectiveness in privacy-protection tasks requiring selective information withholding. Larger models exhibit stronger reasoning capabilities but still struggle with resolving conflicting instructions. Importantly, these performance gaps cannot be attributed solely to information loss, as models demonstrate strong BLEU scores on memorization tasks but their attention mechanisms fail to effectively integrate multiple related instructions. These findings highlight critical areas for improvement in the complex real-world tasks involving multi-turn instructions.