arXiv AI
When and How Should an Agent Clarify? CIGAsk: Teaching LLMs to Clarify via Counterfactual Information Gain
Read the original on arXiv AI →The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at arXiv AI.
Related stories
arXiv AI
Aug 14
Beyond Outcome Rewards: Step-Level Self-Distilled Policy Optimization for Deep Search Agents
arXiv:2608. 12764v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Deep search agents operate over trajectories spanning dozens of steps, yet standard reinforcement learning provides only a single outcome reward per trajectory, which is far too sparse for effective credit assignment.
arXiv AI
Jun 3
Uncertainty-Aware Clarification in LLM Agents with Information Gain
arXiv:2606. 03135v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large Language Model (LLM) agents often operate under underspecified user instructions, where latent uncertainty over user intent leads to erroneous tool actions.
arXiv AI
Aug 20
From Storage to Access: Verifiable Activation of Parametric Knowledge in LLMs via Explicit Priming and Implicit Reasoning
The paper introduces VAKE, a two‑stage reinforcement‑learning framework that activates latent factual knowledge in large language models. In the Priming stage, the model explicitly inserts bridging triples into an insufficient subgraph, guided by rewards from a frozen model’s answers. The Reasoning stage then trains the model to answer from the original input, demonstrating that the elicitation capability transfers to implicit reasoning and consistently outperforms baselines across multiple benchmarks and model sizes.
arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 17
LEEPS: Latent-Guided Explore-Exploit Prompt Sampling for Efficient RLVR in Large Language Models
arXiv:2607.28077v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) improves the reasoning capabilities of large language models, but prompt groups with identica...
arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 16
Spurious Tool Use: When RL Agents Learn the Wrong Reason to Act
The paper investigates how reinforcement learning can cause large language model agents to adopt shortcut policies for tool use, relying on superficial prompt cues rather than actual task needs. By creating synthetic environments that mix factual QA and math reasoning, the authors show that agents often invoke tools when cues are present, even when those tools are unnecessary, with spurious invocation rates rising up to 39%. They find that shortcut learning occurs mainly when agents have already mastered the target tool and that semantic alignment between cues and tools amplifies the effect. To counter this, they propose a dense, decision-level reward where an LLM judge assesses tool necessity, which reduces cue-driven tool use while maintaining performance.
arXiv AI
Sep 10
Clarify, Abstain or Answer? Strategising in Conversation with Belief-Augmented Generation
arXiv:2605.25831v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) define a distribution over text, which can be viewed as a probabilistic representation of uncertainty: sampling...