BeliefTrack: Benchmarking and Improving Contextual Belief Management in LLMs
This paper introduces Contextual Belief Management (CBM) as a framework for studying how LLMs should update, preserve, or ignore information across long-horizon interactions. The authors release BeliefTrack, a closed-world benchmark with symbolic verifiers enabling exact turn-level evaluation across Rule Discovery and Circuit Diagnosis tasks. Vanilla LLMs show severe CBM failures; reinforcement learning with belief-state rewards reduces failure rates by 70.9% on average, while representation-level steering achieves 46.1% reduction. Probing experiments reveal latent belief-state dynamics underlying these failures.
Related guides (3)
Related events (8)
Systematic study of extrinsic and intrinsic properties for effective code interpreter reasoning in LLMs
Researchers investigate what behavioral properties make LLMs effective at reasoning with a Code Interpreter (CI), identifying two axes: extrinsic 'crucial tokens' and intrinsic 'cognitive behaviors' such as verification, backtracking, and backward chaining. Stronger CI reasoning models consistently exhibit higher prevalence of these properties. The paper shows that appending code-specific crucial tokens at inference time improves performance on mathematical, ordering, and optimization tasks, while augmenting training with cognitive behaviors improves SFT and RL performance in two of three evaluated models. The work also finds these behaviors reduce overthinking in incorrect responses and improve token efficiency.
ContextRL: Context-aware reinforcement learning improves grounding in agentic and multimodal LLMs
Researchers introduce ContextRL, a reinforcement learning method that trains LLMs to select the context that supports a given query-answer pair from two highly similar candidates, rather than supervising only final answers. The approach constructs contrastive context pairs in two domains: coding agent trajectories (1k pairs) and multimodal image pairs (7k pairs). ContextRL achieves +2.2% average gains over standard GRPO on 5 long-horizon benchmarks and +1.8% across 12 visual QA benchmarks, with ablations showing the gains stem from the context-selection objective rather than the contrastive data alone.
LongTraceRL: Reinforcement Learning for Long-Context Reasoning via Search Agent Trajectories and Rubric Rewards
LongTraceRL is a new RL training framework for improving long-context reasoning in LLMs, addressing limitations of existing RLVR methods. It constructs challenging training data using multi-hop questions from knowledge graph random walks and tiered distractors derived from search agent trajectories (high-confusability: read but uncited; low-confusability: seen but unopened). A rubric reward provides entity-level process supervision along reasoning chains, applied only to correct responses to prevent reward hacking. Experiments across three LLMs (4B–30B parameters) on five long-context benchmarks show consistent improvements over strong baselines.
Systematic Study of LLM Linguistic Uncertainty Markers and Intrinsic Confidence Calibration
This paper introduces 'marker internal confidence' (MIC) as a formalization of the intrinsic confidence a model associates with epistemic markers (e.g., 'it is likely...') in a given task domain. The authors present 7 metrics to evaluate MIC stability within and across distributions, finding that LLMs remain miscalibrated even under model-centric interpretation of marker meanings. Models struggle to differentiate markers by internal confidence across distributions, though they preserve a somewhat consistent ranking order across tasks. The work provides complementary evidence toward understanding faithful calibration in LLMs and highlights the need for more stable, aligned marker use.
Counterfactual context revision framework for auditing LLM-based stance simulation in online discussions
Researchers introduce a counterfactual context revision framework to audit how LLMs simulate individual users' stances in online discussions. By applying controlled text-only and multimodal (meme-based) revisions to conversational contexts, they measure how readily simulated stances shift in response to semantically independent changes. Results show effective and robust stance transitions across both revision types and polarization-preference mechanisms, raising concerns about whether LLM simulations reflect genuine user-specific beliefs or are highly context-sensitive artifacts. The work contributes an evaluation framework and highlights risks of using LLMs to model online opinion dynamics.
Tracing the Emergence of Human-Like Pragmatic Reasoning in LLMs Across Languages
Researchers conducted a population-matching experiment evaluating 25 LLMs on conditional inference tasks across four languages, comparing model behavior to matched human populations. The study finds that LLMs function as accurate semantic operators but systematically fail to capture pragmatic enrichments—context-sensitive inferences beyond literal logical meaning—that humans apply effortlessly. Model performance on pragmatic reasoning is not predicted by open vs. closed weights, training orientation, or architecture type, suggesting pragmatic reasoning remains an emergent and unreliable capability. The findings contribute to ongoing debates about whether LLMs reason like humans or merely approximate surface-level linguistic patterns.
Benchmarking study finds LLMs fail at counterintuitive probability problems despite strong standard performance
A new arXiv paper evaluates 8 state-of-the-art LLMs on discrete probability problems using two datasets: standard exercises (average accuracy 0.96) and counterintuitive exercises designed to trigger heuristic reasoning (average accuracy 0.59). The authors document token bias causing 20%+ performance drops when canonical problem formulations are disguised, and up to 34% degradation when misleading suggestions are embedded in prompts. The findings argue that current LLMs are not genuine probabilistic reasoners despite their success on advanced math benchmarks.
Canonical-Context On-Policy Distillation (CCOPD) for Multi-Turn LLM Consistency
This paper identifies 'self-anchored drift' as a key failure mode in multi-turn LLMs: when information is revealed incrementally across turns, models produce unsupported assumptions that distort final answers, even when the total evidence is identical to a single-prompt setting. The authors propose Canonical-Context On-Policy Distillation (CCOPD), which trains a student model on incremental multi-turn conversations to match the output distribution of a frozen teacher conditioned on the full clean prompt. Trained only on math conversations, CCOPD achieves a 32% average relative improvement on multi-turn (RAW-SHARDED) tasks and generalizes zero-shot to five out-of-domain task families while preserving single-prompt performance.