The saturation of high-quality pre-training data has shifted research focus toward evolutionary systems capable of continuously generating novel artifacts, leading to the success of AlphaEvolve. However, the progress of such systems is hindered by the lack of rigorous, quantitative evaluation. To tackle this challenge, we introduce CreativeBench, a benchmark for evaluating machine creativity in code generation, grounded in a classical cognitive framework. Comprising two subsets – CreativeBench-Combo and CreativeBench-Explore – the benchmark targets combinatorial and exploratory creativity through an automated pipeline utilizing reverse engineering and self-play. By leveraging executable code, CreativeBench objectively distinguishes creativity from hallucination via a unified metric defined as the product of quality and novelty. Our analysis of state-of-the-art models reveals distinct behaviors: (1) scaling significantly improves combinatorial creativity but yields diminishing returns for exploration; (2) larger models exhibit “convergence-by-scaling,” becoming more correct but less divergent; and (3) reasoning capabilities primarily benefit constrained exploration rather than combination. Finally, we propose EvoRePE, a plug-and-play inference-time steering strategy that internalizes evolutionary search patterns to consistently enhance machine creativity.

Recent advancements in tool learning have enabled large language models (LLMs) to integrate external tools, enhancing their task performance by expanding their knowledge boundaries. However, relying on tools often introduces trade-offs between performance, speed, and cost, with LLMs sometimes exhibiting overreliance and overconfidence in tool usage. This paper addresses the challenge of aligning LLMs with their knowledge boundaries to make more intelligent decisions about tool invocation. We propose a multi-objective alignment framework that combines probabilistic knowledge boundary estimation with dynamic decision-making, allowing LLMs to better assess when to invoke tools based on their confidence. Our framework includes two methods for knowledge boundary estimation—consistency-based and absolute estimation—and two training strategies for integrating these estimates into the model’s decision-making process. Experimental results on various tool invocation scenarios demonstrate the effectiveness of our framework, showing significant improvements in tool efficiency by reducing unnecessary tool usage.