Existing long-form factuality evaluation relies on the decompose-retrieve-verify pipeline. However, the pipeline suffers from noise from claim decomposition and fixed verification granularity, resulting in unreliable results. We propose ElementCheck, a complexity-aware framework that verifies long-form outputs via sentence elements. Instead of uniformly decomposing sentences into atomic sub-claims, ElementCheck extracts entity pairs that are explicitly linked through verifiable connections in the original sentence as elements, and organizes these into an element graph. The graph topology provides a structural signal for estimating sentence complexity, enabling direct verification for simple sentences and targeted element-level refinement and verification for complex ones. To support fine-grained evaluation, we construct a new benchmark FastFact-Sent by mapping isolated claims from FastFact-Bench back to their source sentences. Experiments on FastFact-Sent and two domain-specific benchmarks show ElementCheck consistently improves factuality verification across five backbone models while maintaining a favorable accuracy-cost trade-off. Further analyses demonstrate that complexity-aware verification reduces unnecessary re-verification and maintains stability across different backbones. The code is available at Here.

Large language models (LLMs) can propose vaccine adjuvant designs with plausible mechanistic rationales, but such outputs often lack grounding in established immunological knowledge. We present SAVANT, a neuro-symbolic framework for LLM-based adjuvant design that combines two-stage constrained generation with literature-grounded verification. SAVANT first generates a natural-language design rationale, then renders it into an ontology-constrained domain-specific language (DSL) using logic masks and finite-state control. To reason under fragmented evidence and incomplete first-principles rules, SAVANT verifies generated designs against literature-derived symbolic evidence through minimal sub-theorem proof. In expert-aligned evaluation, SAVANT shows greater stability in stage-level rank alignment than the strongest LLM-judge baselines, while achieving the strongest alignment for immune-effect support and mechanistic reasoning. SAVANT provides graded, interpretable assessments that distinguish supported mechanisms, under-supported hypotheses, and knowledge gaps for hypothesis-driven experimentation. Data and code will be released at https://github.com/banjiuyufen/SAVANT.

Recent OCR models achieve strong results on document benchmarks, with several 1–2B OCR-specialized models surpassing much larger general multimodal LLMs (MLLMs). However, complex real-world documents often contain blur, cropping, curved text, handwriting, and unfamiliar structures, which remain challenging for current OCR systems. We trace this gap to a shift in the error source: errors on canonical benchmarks mainly arise from layout analysis, including localization, element classification, and reading order, while errors under these challenging conditions mainly arise from content recognition. To this end, we propose CL-OCR, a two-stage framework that first fuses semantic structure from an MLLM-based detector with geometric candidates from a vision detector to obtain calibrated layouts, then enhances recognition via a shared LoRA adapter gated by a lightweight router. We further construct OCRWildBench and a companion training split to study these conditions. Experiments show that CL-OCR remains competitive on canonical benchmarks and achieves the strongest overall performance among OCR-specialized models on OCRWildBench.

Large reasoning models (LRMs) show strong capabilities in complex reasoning, yet their marginal gains on evidence-dependent factual questions are limited. We find this limitation is partially attributable to a reasoning–answer hit gap, where the model identifies the correct facts during reasoning but fails to incorporate them into the final response, thereby reducing factual fidelity. To address this issue, we propose MR-ALIGN, a Meta-Reasoning informed alignment framework that enhances factuality without relying on external verifiers. MR-ALIGN quantifies state-transition probabilities along the model’s thinking process and constructs a transition-aware implicit reward that reinforces beneficial reasoning patterns while suppressing defective ones at the atomic thinking segments. This re-weighting reshapes token-level signals into probability-aware segment scores, encouraging coherent reasoning trajectories that are more conducive to factual correctness. Empirical evaluations across four factual QA datasets and one long-form factuality benchmark show that MR-ALIGN consistently improves accuracy and truthfulness while reducing misleading reasoning. These results highlight that aligning the reasoning process itself, rather than merely the outputs, is pivotal for advancing factuality in LRMs.