arXiv:2604. 17244v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language model (LLM) agents for sequential decision-making struggle to produce diverse outputs.
By Priya Gurjar, Md Farhan Ishmam, Kenneth Marino
arXiv:2610.09858v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Large language model agents tackle multi-step tasks by interleaving reasoning and tool calls with observations from the environment. Prior work has s...
By Sergei Polezhaev, Barys Liskavets, Ori Press, Alexander Golubev
AgentRM proposes a generalizable reward model to guide LLM-based agents during test-time search, outperforming direct policy fine-tuning. Three reward modeling strategies—explicit, implicit, and LLM-as-a-judge—are explored, and AgentRM improves base policy performance by an average of 8.8 points across nine tasks, surpassing top general agents by 4.0 points. It also shows strong weak-to-strong generalization and can boost specialized agents, with plans to release code for further research.
By Yu Xia, Jingru Fan, Weize Chen, Siyu Yan, Xin Cong, Zhong Zhang, Yaxi Lu, Yankai Lin, Zhiyuan Liu, Maosong Sun
The paper investigates how trajectory fine‑tuning can enhance small language models (SLMs) as next‑action controllers in retrieval‑augmented question answering. By building a seven‑way action‑prediction task from teacher search traces, the authors fine‑tune SLMs and cross‑lingual SLMs (xSLMs) using LoRA and evaluate on 1,646 held‑out examples, achieving a macro‑F1 of 0.6536 with Granite 4.1 3B. In an end‑to‑end controller/generator swap experiment on 149 trajectories, the fine‑tuned model improves Exact Match from 0.7530 to 0.7946 and token F1 from 0.7783 to 0.8295, demonstrating that trajectory supervision boosts action prediction and evidence‑recording behavior.
By Mohammed Al-Maamari, Saber Zerhoudi, Michael Granitzer, Jelena Mitrovi\'c
arXiv:2610.02330v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) rely on long-horizon tool invocation sequences for complex tasks, where each invocation can alter the task state and condi...
By Yu Li, Zheng Zhang, Xin Liu, Shengtian Yang, Guangfeng Cai, Lei Feng
The paper introduces the Agent-Editing World Model (AEWM), a new approach that models how reasoning and actions influence future task progress instead of simulating tool responses. AEWM includes an Action Judge that classifies decisions as Critical, Exploratory, or Noisy, and a State Revision mechanism that edits noisy reasoning–action continuations from the same observed history. The integrated system, EditAct, directly updates the underlying state during real execution, leading to significant performance gains across multiple benchmarks and agent backbones.
By Shuang Sun, Guoxin Chen, Fanzhe Meng, Jia Deng, Huatong Song, Jinhao Jiang, Wayne Xin Zhao, Hongteng Xu, Ji-Rong Wen