Ruochen Zhou
Author directory2026
PruneTIR: Inference-Time Tool Call Pruning for Effective yet Efficient Tool-Integrated Reasoning
Luan Zhang | Dandan Song | Zhijing Wu | Zhengyu Chen | Chen Zhang | Yuhang Tian | Huipeng Ma | Chenhao Li | Changzhi Zhou | Xudong Li | Ruochen Zhou | Shuhao Zhang
Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2026
Luan Zhang | Dandan Song | Zhijing Wu | Zhengyu Chen | Chen Zhang | Yuhang Tian | Huipeng Ma | Chenhao Li | Changzhi Zhou | Xudong Li | Ruochen Zhou | Shuhao Zhang
Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2026
Tool-integrated reasoning (TIR) enables large language models (LLMs) to enhance their capabilities by interacting with external tools, such as code interpreters (CI). Most recent studies focus on exploring various methods to equip LLMs with the ability to use tools. However, how to further boost the reasoning ability of already tool-capable LLMs at inference time remains underexplored. Improving reasoning at inference time requires no additional training and can help LLMs better leverage tools to solve problems. We observe that, during tool-capable LLM inference, both the number and the proportion of erroneous tool calls are negatively correlated with answer correctness. Moreover, erroneous tool calls are typically resolved successfully within a few subsequent turns. If not, LLMs often struggle to resolve such errors even with many additional turns. Building on the above observations, we propose **PruneTIR**, a rather effective yet efficient framework that enhances the tool-integrated reasoning at inference time. During LLM inference, PruneTIR prunes trajectories, resamples tool calls, and suspends tool usage through three components: *Success-Triggered Pruning*, *Stuck-Triggered Pruning and Resampling*, and *Retry-Triggered Tool Suspension*. These three components enable PruneTIR to mitigate the negative impact of erroneous tool calls and prevent LLMs from getting stuck in repeated failed resolution attempts, thereby improving overall LLM performance. Extensive experimental results demonstrate the effectiveness of PruneTIR, which significantly improves Pass@1 and efficiency while reducing the working context length for tool-capable LLMs.
Why Do LLM Agents Fail in Exploring New Environments? A World-Modeling Perspective
Shiqi Chen | Tongyao Zhu | Zian Wang | Jinghan Zhang | Kangrui Wang | Ruochen Zhou | Siyang Gao | Teng Xiao | Yee Whye Teh | Junxian He | Manling Li
Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2026
Shiqi Chen | Tongyao Zhu | Zian Wang | Jinghan Zhang | Kangrui Wang | Ruochen Zhou | Siyang Gao | Teng Xiao | Yee Whye Teh | Junxian He | Manling Li
Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2026
Large Language Models (LLMs) as agents often fail to improve in new environments. We identify and characterize a failure mode we call exploration collapse: under reinforcement learning (RL) in environments whose states are unfamiliar to the policy, Pass@k, the probability that at least one of k sampled trajectories succeeds, drops markedly over training even as Pass@1 edges up, revealing increasingly brittle exploration; environments closer to the pretraining distribution show no such decline. We trace this collapse to weak grounding in environment states and dynamics, and study a simple remedy: explicitly teaching the agent to estimate the current state and predict its transitions before optimizing for reward. We instantiate it as SPA, an explore-then-exploit recipe that cold-starts the policy with a Self-Experience supervised finetuning (SFT) stage, collecting the model’s own interaction trajectories and supervising state and next-state prediction, and then runs standard RL. The resulting world model serves as a grounded initialization for RL rather than an inference-time planner. Across unseen environments, SPA consistently and substantially improves over vanilla RL: for example, it raises the Sokoban success rate from 25.6% to 59.8% on Qwen2.5-1.5B-Instruct, letting sub-3B models surpass a 20B baseline on these tasks. Controlled studies indicate that the gains track four factors: grounded state representations, explicit transition modeling, self-experience trajectories from a sufficiently strong exploration policy, and adequate coverage of transition data.