Personalized large language models (LLMs) adapt model behavior to individual users to enhance user satisfaction, yet personalization can inadvertently distort factual reasoning. We show that when personalized LLMs face factual queries, there exists a phenomenon where the model generates answers aligned with a user’s prior history rather than the objective truth, resulting in personalization-induced hallucinations that degrade factual reliability and may propagate incorrect beliefs, due to representational entanglement between personalization and factual representations. To address this issue, we propose Factuality-Preserving Personalized Steering (FPPS), a lightweight inference-time approach that mitigates personalization-induced factual distortions while preserving personalized behavior. We further introduce PFQABench, the first benchmark designed to jointly evaluate factual and personalized question answering under personalization. Experiments across multiple LLM backbones and personalization methods show that FPPS substantially improves factual accuracy while maintaining personalized performance.

Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) has become a central approach for improving the reasoning ability of large language models. Recent work studies RLVR through token entropy, arguing that high-entropy tokens drive exploration and should receive stronger updates. However, they overlook the fact that most of a reasoning trajectory consists of low-entropy segments that encode stable and reusable structural patterns. Through qualitative and quantitative analyses, we find that the overlap of low-entropy segments across correct responses strongly correlates with model accuracy, while overlaps involving incorrect responses exhibit stable but unproductive patterns. Motivated by these findings, we propose LESS, a correctness-aware reinforcement framework that performs fine-grained advantage modulation over low-entropy segments. LESS amplifies segments unique to correct responses, suppresses those unique to incorrect ones, and neutralizes segments shared by both, while preserving high-entropy exploration in the underlying RL algorithm. Instantiated on top of GRPO and GSPO, LESS not only improves accuracy over strong RL baselines across three backbones and six math benchmarks, but also achieves stronger robustness of the performance floor.

Generative recommendation represents items as semantic identifiers (SIDs), i.e., sequences of discrete tokens, and typically predict the next item autoregressively. Despite their strong performance, such methods suffer from two limitations: (1) unidirectional constraints, where causal attention enforces left-to-right dependencies and limits global semantic modeling; and (2) error accumulation, where early mistakes propagate to later tokens and hurt recommendation accuracy. To address these issues, we propose LLaDA-Rec, a discrete diffusion framework that reformulates next-item recommendation as parallel SID generation. By combining bidirectional attention with an adaptive generation order, LLaDA-Rec captures richer inter-item and intra-item dependencies while reducing error accumulation. Our framework includes three key components: (1) a parallel tokenization mechanism for diffusion-compatible SIDs; (2) masking strategies at both the user-history and next-item levels; and (3) an adapted beam search algorithm for adaptive-order discrete diffusion decoding. Experiments on three public datasets show that LLaDA-Rec consistently outperforms both conventional ID-based recommenders and strong generative baselines, highlighting discrete diffusion as a promising paradigm for generative recommendation.

In legal practice, judges apply the trichotomous dogmatics of criminal law, sequentially assessingthe elements of the offense, unlawfulness, and culpability to determine whether an individual’s conduct constitutes a crime. Although current legal large language models (LLMs) show promising accuracy in judgment prediction, they lack trichotomous reasoning capabilities due to the absence of an appropriate benchmark dataset, preventing them from predicting innocent outcomes. As a result, every input is automatically assigned a charge, limiting their practical utility in legal contexts. To bridge this gap, we introduce LJPIV, the first benchmark dataset for Legal Judgment Prediction with Innocent Verdicts. Adhering to the trichotomous dogmatics, we extend three widely-used legal datasets through LLM-based augmentation and manual verification. Our experiments with state-of-the-art legal LLMs and novel strategies that integrate trichotomous reasoning into zero-shot prompting and fine-tuning reveal: (1) current legal LLMs have significant room for improvement, with even the best models achieving an F1 score of less than 0.3 on LJPIV; and (2) our strategies notably enhance both in-domain and cross-domain judgment prediction accuracy, especially for cases resulting in an innocent verdict.

Legal mathematical reasoning is essential for applying large language models (LLMs) in high-stakes legal contexts, where outputs must be both mathematically accurate and procedurally compliant. However, existing legal LLMs lack structured numerical reasoning, and open-domain models, though capable of calculations, often overlook mandatory legal steps. To address this, we present LexNum, the first Chinese legal mathematical reasoning benchmark, covering three representative scenarios where each instance reflects legally grounded procedural flows. We further propose LexPam, a two-stage reinforcement learning framework for efficient legal reasoning training. Leveraging curriculum learning, we use a stronger teacher model to partition data into basic and challenging subsets. A lightweight 1.5B student model is then fine-tuned with Group Relative Policy Optimization, which avoids costly value networks and enables stable training from sparse, end-of-sequence rewards. The first stage improves accuracy and format; the second introduces a novel reward to guide procedural alignment via task-specific legal elements. Experiments show that existing models perform poorly on LexNum, while LexPam enhances both mathematical accuracy and legal coherence, and generalizes effectively across tasks and domains.

In this paper, we propose CitaLaw, the first benchmark designed to evaluate LLMs’ ability to produce legally sound responses with appropriate citations. CitaLaw features a diverse set of legal questions for both laypersons and practitioners, paired with a comprehensive corpus of law articles and precedent cases as a reference pool. This framework enables LLM-based systems to retrieve supporting citations from the reference corpus and align these citations with the corresponding sentences in their responses. Moreover, we introduce syllogism-inspired evaluation methods to assess the legal alignment between retrieved references and LLM-generated responses, as well as their consistency with user questions. Extensive experiments on 2 open-domain and 7 legal-specific LLMs demonstrate that integrating legal references substantially enhances response quality. Furthermore, our proposed syllogism-based evaluation method exhibits strong agreement with human judgments.

Personalized search systems in e-commerce platforms increasingly involve user interactions with AI assistants, where users consult about products, usage scenarios, and more. Leveraging consultation to personalize search services is trending. Existing methods typically rely on semantic similarity to align historical consultations with current queries due to the absence of ‘value’ labels, but we observe that semantic similarity alone often fails to capture the true value of consultation for personalization. To address this, we propose a consultation value assessment framework that evaluates historical consultations from three novel perspectives: (1) Scenario Scope Value, (2) Posterior Action Value, and (3) Time Decay Value. Based on this, we introduce VAPS, a value-aware personalized search model that selectively incorporates high-value consultations through a consultation–user action interaction module and an explicit objective that aligns consultations with user actions. Experiments on both public and commercial datasets show that VAPS consistently outperforms baselines in both retrieval and ranking tasks. Codes are available at https://github.com/E-qin/VAPS.

Personalized product search aims to retrieve and rank items that match users’ preferences and search intent. Despite their effectiveness, existing approaches typically assume that users’ query fully captures their real motivation. However, our analysis of a real-world e-commerce platform reveals that users often engage in relevant consultations before searching, indicating they refine intents through consultations based on motivation and need. The implied motivation in consultations is a key enhancing factor for personalized search. This unexplored area comes with new challenges including aligning contextual motivations with concise queries, bridging the category-text gap, and filtering noise within sequence history. To address these, we propose a Motivation-Aware Personalized Search (MAPS) method. It embeds queries and consultations into a unified semantic space via LLMs, utilizes a Mixture of Attention Experts (MoAE) to prioritize critical semantics, and introduces dual alignment: (1) contrastive learning aligns consultations, reviews, and product features; (2) bidirectional attention integrates motivation-aware embeddings with user preferences. Extensive experiments on real and synthetic data show MAPS outperforms existing methods in both retrieval and ranking tasks. Code and supplementary materials are available at: https://github.com/E-qin/MAPS.