Reinforcement learning (RL)-based enhancement of large language models (LLMs) often leads to reduced output diversity, undermining their utility in open-ended tasks like creative writing. Current methods lack explicit mechanisms for guiding diverse exploration and instead prioritize optimization efficiency and performance over diversity. This paper proposes an RL framework structured around a semi-structured long Chain-of-Thought (CoT), in which the generation process is decomposed into explicitly planned intermediate steps. We introduce a Diverse Planning Branching method that strategically introduces divergence at the planning phase based on diversity variation, alongside a group-aware diversity reward to encourage distinct trajectories. Experimental results on creative writing benchmarks demonstrate that our approach significantly improves output diversity without compromising generation quality, consistently outperforming existing baselines.

Recent advances in reasoning with large language models (LLMs) have popularized Long Chain-of-Thought (LCoT), a strategy that encourages deliberate and step-by-step reasoning before producing a final answer. While LCoTs have enabled expert-level performance in complex tasks, how the internal structures of their reasoning chains drive, or even predict, the correctness of final answers remains a critical yet underexplored question. In this work, we present LCoT2Tree, an automated framework that converts sequential LCoTs into hierarchical tree structures and thus enables deeper structural analysis of LLM reasoning. Using graph neural networks (GNNs), we reveal that structural patterns extracted by LCoT2Tree, including exploration, backtracking, and verification, serve as stronger predictors of final performance across a wide range of tasks and models. Leveraging an explainability technique, we further identify critical thought patterns such as over-branching that account for failures. Beyond diagnostic insights, the structural patterns by LCoT2Tree support practical applications, including improving Best-of-N decoding effectiveness. Overall, our results underscore the critical role of internal structures of reasoning chains, positioning LCoT2Tree as a powerful tool for diagnosing, interpreting, and improving reasoning in LLMs.

Video captioning can be used to assess the video understanding capabilities of Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs).However, existing benchmarks and evaluation protocols suffer from crucial issues, such as inadequate or homogeneous creation of key points, exorbitant cost of data creation, and limited evaluation scopes. To address these issues, we propose an automatic framework, named AutoCaption, which leverages Monte Carlo Tree Search (MCTS) to construct numerous and diverse descriptive sentences (i.e., key points) that thoroughly represent video content in an iterative way. This iterative captioning strategy enables the continuous enhancement of video details such as actions, objects’ attributes, environment details, etc. We apply AutoCaption to curate MCTS-VCB, a fine-grained video caption benchmark covering video details, thereby enabling a comprehensive evaluation of MLLMs on the video captioning task. We evaluate more than 20 open- and closed-source MLLMs of varying sizes on MCTS-VCB. Results show that MCTS-VCB can effectively and comprehensively evaluate the video captioning capability, with Gemini-1.5-Pro achieving the highest F1 score of 71.2. Interestingly, we fine-tune InternVL2.5-8B with the AutoCaption-generated data, which helps the model achieve an overall improvement of 25.0% on MCTS-VCB and 16.3% on DREAM-1K, further demonstrating the effectiveness of AutoCaption. The code and data are available at https://github.com/tjunlp-lab/MCTS-VCB.

Current practices in metric evaluation focus on one single dataset, e.g., Newstest dataset in each year’s WMT Metrics Shared Task. However, in this paper, we qualitatively and quantitatively show that the performances of metrics are sensitive to data. The ranking of metrics varies when the evaluation is conducted on different datasets. Then this paper further investigates two potential hypotheses, i.e., insignificant data points and the deviation of i.i.d assumption, which may take responsibility for the issue of data variance. In conclusion, our findings suggest that when evaluating automatic translation metrics, researchers should take data variance into account and be cautious to report the results on unreliable datasets, because it may leads to inconsistent results with most of the other datasets.