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.

Training tool-use agents typically relies on outcome-based filtering: Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT) on successful trajectories and Reinforcement Learning (RL) on pass-rate-selected tasks. However, this paradigm ignores interaction dynamics—successful trajectories may lack error recovery or exhibit redundancy, while pass rates fail to distinguish structurally informative tasks from trivial ones. To bridge this gap, we propose TopoCurate, an interaction-aware framework that shifts the paradigm from linear outcome filtering to topological interaction modeling. By projecting multi-trial rollouts into a unified semantic quotient topology within the same task, we construct a structured manifold that explicitly captures the divergence between success and failure pathways across tool invocations and environmental responses. Leveraging this representation, we introduce a dual-selection mechanism: for SFT, we prioritize trajectories demonstrating reflective recovery, semantic efficiency, and strategic diversity to mitigate covariate shift and mode collapse; for RL, we select tasks with high error branch ratios and strategic heterogeneity, maximizing gradient Signal-to-Noise Ratio to address vanishing signals in sparse-reward settings. Evaluations on BFCLv3 and Tau2 Bench show that TopoCurate achieves consistent gains of 4.2% (SFT) and 6.9% (RL) over state-of-the-art baselines.

Current Large Language Model (LLM) agents struggle with long-horizon reasoning tasks, such as competition-level mathematics, where sustaining precision over hundreds of steps is critical. A primary bottleneck is the reliance on natural language context or summaries to track progress; these linguistic representations are inherently "lossy," introducing semantic drift and accumulating errors that derail the reasoning chain. To address this, we propose Structured Strategy Folding (SSF), a novel paradigm that shifts the agent’s memory mechanism from linguistic description to computational verification. Instead of compressing history into text, SSF "folds" the reasoning trajectory into a sequence of Executable Symbolic States (ESS). Each ESS serves as a verifiable anchor—comprising either executed code artifacts or formally judged symbolic lemmas—generated through a dual-pathway validation mechanism. By interacting with these rigorous state artifacts rather than raw textual history, the agent effectively eliminates ambiguity and prevents error propagation. Experiments on challenging mathematical benchmarks demonstrate that SSF significantly outperforms standard Chain-of-Thought and existing summarization baselines, achieving substantial accuracy improvements while maintaining robust performance over extended reasoning horizons.

Choosing the right large language model (LLM) backbone is the most consequential decision when building a vision-language model (VLM), yet it remains fundamentally unprincipled: compute-based scaling laws fail to generalize across model families, and no framework exists for directly predicting VLM performance before training begins. We propose the Capability-Driven Multimodal Scaling Law, the first cross-family framework that predicts VLM benchmark accuracy from directly observable textual capability. Given a low-dimensional capability score S extracted from LLM textual benchmarks via PCA, we model VLM performance as a function of S, with a per-backbone transfer rate A and an absorption rate B that quantifies data-scaling efficiency. To fit and validate the framework, we train over 150 VLMs on 34 LLMs spanning 7 model families under a strictly controlled recipe. Evaluations on more than 200 textual and 50 multimodal benchmarks show that the law accurately extrapolates transfer rate from models up to 8B parameters to 72B-scale backbones, predicts full VLM training trajectories with high fidelity, and generalizes to entirely held-out model families. Beyond the scaling law, our analysis surfaces actionable insights: certain textual benchmarks negatively correlate with multimodal performance, exposing latent benchmark-gaming behavior; base LLMs outperform instruction-tuned counterparts as VLM backbones due to higher absorption rates and lower data-scaling decay; and different model families occupy distinct positions in the transfer–absorption space. The framework turns backbone selection from costly empirical sweeps into a principled, quantitative decision.

Standard tokenizers over-fragment domain terms, disrupting morpheme semantics. We characterize this representational misalignment as Structural Knowledge Collapse (SKC), where attention mechanisms fail to reconstruct coherent concepts from fragmented inputs. While existing input-centric solutions like vocabulary expansion address this, they necessitate expensive embedding retraining and neglect internal attention compositionality. To this end, we introduce Morpheme-aware KV-aggregation Attention (MorphKA), a lightweight adapter that dynamically consolidates fragments without tokenizer changes. Bypassing tokenizer retraining, MorphKA employs a dual-phase strategy, Input-Level Morpheme Aggregation (IMA) and Context-Aware KV-Aggregation (AMRF), to stabilize morpheme spans and synthesize higher-order concepts. Experiments on medical and legal benchmarks show MorphKA outperforms vocabulary adaptation baselines by 3.2–4.6%, reaching 7.9% on high-fragmentation terms. Moreover, MorphKA reduces catastrophic interference on general capabilities by 18–22% with ~80% fewer parameters than embedding retraining approaches.

Existing pretraining data mixing methods for large language models (LLMs) typically follow a domain-wise methodology, a top-down process that first determines domain weights and then performs uniform data sampling across each domain. However, these approaches neglect significant inter-domain overlaps and commonalities, failing to control the global diversity of the constructed training dataset. Further, uniform sampling within domains ignores fine-grained sample-specific features, potentially leading to suboptimal data distribution. To address these shortcomings, we propose a novel sample-wise data mixture approach based on a bottom-up paradigm. This method performs global cross-domain sampling by systematically evaluating the quality and diversity of each sample, thereby dynamically determining the optimal domain distribution. Comprehensive experiments across multiple downstream tasks and perplexity assessments demonstrate that SampleMix surpasses existing domain-based methods. Meanwhile, SampleMix requires 1.4x to 2.1x fewer training steps to achieve the baselines’ performance, highlighting the substantial potential of SampleMix to optimize pre-training data.

The use of large language models (LLMs) as judges, particularly in preference comparisons, has become widespread, but this reveals a notable bias towards longer responses, undermining the reliability of such evaluations. To better understand such bias, we propose to decompose the preference evaluation metric, specifically the win rate, into two key components: desirability and information mass, where the former is length-independent and related to trustworthiness such as correctness, toxicity, and consistency, and the latter is length-dependent and represents the amount of information in the response. We empirically demonstrated the decomposition through controlled experiments and found that response length impacts evaluations by influencing information mass. To derive a reliable evaluation metric that assesses content quality without being confounded by response length, we propose AdapAlpaca, a simple yet effective adjustment to win rate measurement. Specifically, AdapAlpaca ensures a fair comparison of response quality by aligning the lengths of reference and test model responses under equivalent length intervals.

Traditional scaling laws in natural language processing suggest that increasing model size and training data enhances performance. However, recent studies reveal deviations, particularly in large language models, where performance improvements decelerate—a phenomenon known as sub-scaling. This paper revisits these scaling laws by examining the impact of data quality and training strategies on model performance. Through extensive empirical analysis of over 400 models, we identify high data density and non-optimal resource allocation as key factors contributing to sub-scaling. High data density leads to diminishing returns due to redundant information, while optimal resource allocation is crucial for sustained performance improvements. We propose a sub-optimal scaling law that better predicts performance in sub-scaling regimes, highlighting the importance of data quality and diversity.

Textual Attributed Graphs (TAGs) are crucial for modeling complex real-world systems, yet leveraging large language models (LLMs) for TAGs presents unique challenges due to the gap between sequential text processing and graph-structured data. We introduce AskGNN, a novel approach that bridges this gap by leveraging In-Context Learning (ICL) to integrate graph data and task-specific information into LLMs. AskGNN employs a Graph Neural Network (GNN)-powered structure-enhanced retriever to select labeled nodes across graphs, incorporating complex graph structures and their supervision signals. Our learning-to-retrieve algorithm optimizes the retriever to select example nodes that maximize LLM performance on graph. Experiments across three tasks and seven LLMs demonstrate AskGNN’s superior effectiveness in graph task performance, opening new avenues for applying LLMs to graph-structured data without extensive fine-tuning.

The scaling of large language models (LLMs) is a critical research area for the efficiency and effectiveness of model training and deployment. Our work investigates the transferability and discrepancies of scaling laws between Dense Models and Mixture of Experts (MoE) models. Through a combination of theoretical analysis and extensive experiments, including consistent loss scaling, optimal batch size/learning rate scaling, and resource allocation strategies scaling, our findings reveal that the power-law scaling framework also applies to MoE Models, indicating that the fundamental principles governing the scaling behavior of these models are preserved, even though the architecture differs. Additionally, MoE Models demonstrate superior generalization, resulting in lower testing losses with the same training compute budget compared to Dense Models. These findings indicate the scaling consistency and transfer generalization capabilities of MoE Models, providing new insights for optimizing MoE Model training and deployment strategies.

Prompt engineering, as an efficient and effective way to leverage Large Language Models (LLM), has drawn a lot of attention from the research community. The existing research primarily emphasizes the importance of adapting prompts to specific tasks, rather than specific LLMs. However, a good prompt is not solely defined by its wording, but also binds to the nature of the LLM in question. In this work, we first quantitatively demonstrate that different prompts should be adapted to different LLMs to enhance their capabilities across various downstream tasks in NLP. Then we novelly propose a model-adaptive prompt optimizer (MAPO) method that optimizes the original prompts for each specific LLM in downstream tasks. Extensive experiments indicate that the proposed method can effectively refine prompts for an LLM, leading to significant improvements over various downstream tasks.