Large language models (LLMs) often struggle with complex reasoning tasks due to their limitations in addressing the vast reasoning space and inherent ambiguities of natural language. We propose the Mixture-of-Search-Agents (MOSA) paradigm, a novel approach leveraging the collective expertise of multiple LLMs to enhance search-based reasoning. MOSA integrates diverse reasoning pathways by combining independent exploration with iterative refinement among LLMs, mitigating the limitations of single-model approaches. Using Monte Carlo Tree Search (MCTS) as a backbone, MOSA enables multiple agents to propose and aggregate reasoning steps, resulting in improved accuracy. Our comprehensive evaluation across four reasoning benchmarks demonstrates MOSA’s consistent performance improvements over single-agent and other multi-agent baselines, particularly in complex mathematical and commonsense reasoning tasks.

Scaling data and model size has been proven effective for boosting the performance of large language models. In addition to training-time scaling, recent studies have revealed that increasing test-time computational resources can further improve performance. In this work, we introduce Aggregation Fine-Tuning (AFT), a supervised fine-tuning paradigm where the model learns to synthesize multiple draft responses, referred to as proposals, into a single, refined answer, termed aggregation. At inference time, we apply a propose-and-aggregate strategy that iteratively generates and aggregates proposals, effectively scaling inference-time computation without relying on external guidance such as a reward model. Empirical results across benchmark datasets demonstrate that AFT-trained models achieve substantial gains with test-time scaling, outperforming best-of-N baselines while eliminating the need for external reward signals. Notably, an AFT model, fine-tuned from Llama3.1-8B-Base with only 64k data, achieves a 41.3% LC win rate on AlpacaEval 2, surpassing significantly larger LLMs such as Llama3.1-405B-Instruct and GPT-4. By combining sequential refinement and parallel sampling, the propose-and-aggregate framework scales inference-time computation in a flexible manner.

As large language models (LLMs) are increasingly applied to legal domain-specific tasks, evaluating their ability to perform legal work in real-world settings has become essential. However, existing legal benchmarks rely on simplified and highly standardized tasks, failing to capture the ambiguity, complexity, and reasoning demands of real legal practice. Moreover, prior evaluations often adopt coarse, single-dimensional metrics and do not explicitly assess fine-grained legal reasoning. To address these limitations, we introduce PLawBench, a Practical Law Benchmark designed to evaluate LLMs in realistic legal practice scenarios. Grounded in real-world legal workflows, PLawBench models the core processes of legal practitioners through three task categories: public legal consultation, practical case analysis, and legal document generation. These tasks assess a model’s ability to identify legal issues and key facts, perform structured legal reasoning, and generate legally coherent documents. PLawBench comprises 850 questions across 13 practical legal scenarios, with each question accompanied by expert-designed evaluation rubrics, resulting in approximately 12,500 rubric items for fine-grained assessment. Using an LLM-based evaluator aligned with human expert judgments, we evaluate 10 state-of-the-art LLMs. Experimental results show that none achieves strong performance on PLawBench, revealing substantial limitations in the fine-grained legal reasoning capabilities of current LLMs and highlighting important directions for future evaluation and development of legal LLMs. Data is available at: https://anonymous.4open.science/r/PLawbench-B524/.

Two lines of approaches are adopted for complex reasoning with LLMs. One line of work prompts LLMs with various reasoning structures, while the structural outputs can be naturally regarded as intermediate reasoning steps. Another line of work adopt LLM-free declarative solvers to do the reasoning task, rendering higher reasoning accuracy but lacking interpretability due to the black-box nature of the solvers. Aiming to resolve the trade-off between answer accuracy and interpretability, we present a simple extension to the latter line of work. Specifically, we showcase that the intermediate search logs generated by Prolog interpreters can be accessed and interpreted into human-readable reasoning proofs. As long as LLMs correctly translate problem descriptions into Prolog representations, the corresponding reasoning proofs are ensured to be causal and reliable. On two logical reasoning and one arithmetic reasoning datasets, our framework obtains significant improvements in terms of both answer accuracy and reasoning proof accuracy. We released our code at https://github.com/DAMO-NLP-SG/CaRing for future research regarding better reasoning proofs using LLMs.

While Large Language Models (LLMs) demonstrate impressive capabilities, they still struggle with generating factually incorrect content (i.e., hallucinations). A promising approach to mitigate this issue is enabling models to express uncertainty when unsure. Previous research on uncertainty modeling has primarily focused on short-form QA, but real-world applications often require much longer responses. In this work, we introduce the task of Long-form Generation with Uncertainty (LoGU). We identify two key challenges: Uncertainty Suppression, where models hesitate to express uncertainty, and Uncertainty Misalignment, where models convey uncertainty inaccurately. To tackle these challenges, we propose a refinement-based data collection framework and a two-stage training pipeline. Our framework adopts a divide-and-conquer strategy, refining uncertainty based on atomic claims. The collected data are then used in training through supervised fine-tuning (SFT) and direct preference optimization (DPO) to enhance uncertainty expression. Extensive experiments on three long-form instruction following datasets show that our method significantly improves accuracy, reduces hallucinations, and maintains the comprehensiveness of responses.

Iterative preference learning, though yielding superior performances, requires online annotated preference labels. In this work, we study strategies to save annotation budgets while achieving competitive or even better performances for iterative preference learning. Built on intuitions from active learning, we empirically show that annotating those response pairs with small margins is generally better than large or random. Besides, experiments under the multi-iteration scenario suggest allocating more annotation budgets in the earlier iterations rather than later ones.

Despite the remarkable achievements of large language models (LLMs) in various tasks, there remains a linguistic bias that favors high-resource languages, such as English, often at the expense of low-resource and regional languages. To address this imbalance, we introduce SeaLLMs, an innovative series of language models that specifically focuses on Southeast Asian (SEA) languages. SeaLLMs are built upon popular English-centric models through continued pre-training with an extended vocabulary, specialized instruction and alignment tuning to better capture the intricacies of regional languages. This allows them to respect and reflect local cultural norms, customs, stylistic preferences, and legal considerations. Our comprehensive evaluation demonstrates that SeaLLM models exhibit superior performance across a wide spectrum of linguistic tasks and assistant-style instruction-following capabilities relative to comparable open-source models. Moreover, they outperform ChatGPT-3.5 in non-Latin languages, such as Thai, Khmer, Lao, and Burmese, by large margins while remaining lightweight and cost-effective to operate.

Neural constituency parsers have reached practical performance on news-domain benchmarks. However, their generalization ability to other domains remains weak. Existing findings on cross-domain constituency parsing are only made on a limited number of domains. Tracking this, we manually annotate a high-quality constituency treebank containing five domains. We analyze challenges to open-domain constituency parsing using a set of linguistic features on various strong constituency parsers. Primarily, we find that 1) BERT significantly increases parsers’ cross-domain performance by reducing their sensitivity on the domain-variant features.2) Compared with single metrics such as unigram distribution and OOV rate, challenges to open-domain constituency parsing arise from complex features, including cross-domain lexical and constituent structure variations.

Thanks to the strong representation power of neural encoders, neural chart-based parsers have achieved highly competitive performance by using local features. Recently, it has been shown that non-local features in CRF structures lead to improvements. In this paper, we investigate injecting non-local features into the training process of a local span-based parser, by predicting constituent n-gram non-local patterns and ensuring consistency between non-local patterns and local constituents. Results show that our simple method gives better results than the self-attentive parser on both PTB and CTB. Besides, our method achieves state-of-the-art BERT-based performance on PTB (95.92 F1) and strong performance on CTB (92.31 F1). Our parser also outperforms the self-attentive parser in multi-lingual and zero-shot cross-domain settings.