Nankai University
Abstract:Personalized search systems in e-commerce platforms increasingly involve user interactions with AI assistants, where users consult about products, usage scenarios, and more. Leveraging consultation to personalize search services is trending. Existing methods typically rely on semantic similarity to align historical consultations with current queries due to the absence of 'value' labels, but we observe that semantic similarity alone often fails to capture the true value of consultation for personalization. To address this, we propose a consultation value assessment framework that evaluates historical consultations from three novel perspectives: (1) Scenario Scope Value, (2) Posterior Action Value, and (3) Time Decay Value. Based on this, we introduce VAPS, a value-aware personalized search model that selectively incorporates high-value consultations through a consultation-user action interaction module and an explicit objective that aligns consultations with user actions. Experiments on both public and commercial datasets show that VAPS consistently outperforms baselines in both retrieval and ranking tasks.
Abstract:As models become increasingly sophisticated, conventional algorithm benchmarks are increasingly saturated, underscoring the need for more challenging benchmarks to guide future improvements in algorithmic reasoning. This paper introduces OIBench, a high-quality, private, and challenging olympiad-level informatics dataset comprising 250 carefully curated original problems. We detail the construction methodology of the benchmark, ensuring a comprehensive assessment across various programming paradigms and complexities, and we demonstrate its contamination-resistant properties via experiments. We propose Time/Space Completion Curves for finer-grained efficiency analysis and enable direct human-model comparisons through high-level participant evaluations. Our experiments reveal that while open-source models lag behind closed-source counterparts, current SOTA models already outperform most human participants in both correctness and efficiency, while still being suboptimal compared to the canonical solutions. By releasing OIBench as a fully open-source resource (https://huggingface.co/datasets/AGI-Eval/OIBench), we hope this benchmark will contribute to advancing code reasoning capabilities for future LLMs.
Abstract:Generative AI search is reshaping information retrieval by offering end-to-end answers to complex queries, reducing users' reliance on manually browsing and summarizing multiple web pages. However, while this paradigm enhances convenience, it disrupts the feedback-driven improvement loop that has historically powered the evolution of traditional Web search. Web search can continuously improve their ranking models by collecting large-scale, fine-grained user feedback (e.g., clicks, dwell time) at the document level. In contrast, generative AI search operates through a much longer search pipeline, spanning query decomposition, document retrieval, and answer generation, yet typically receives only coarse-grained feedback on the final answer. This introduces a feedback loop disconnect, where user feedback for the final output cannot be effectively mapped back to specific system components, making it difficult to improve each intermediate stage and sustain the feedback loop. In this paper, we envision NExT-Search, a next-generation paradigm designed to reintroduce fine-grained, process-level feedback into generative AI search. NExT-Search integrates two complementary modes: User Debug Mode, which allows engaged users to intervene at key stages; and Shadow User Mode, where a personalized user agent simulates user preferences and provides AI-assisted feedback for less interactive users. Furthermore, we envision how these feedback signals can be leveraged through online adaptation, which refines current search outputs in real-time, and offline update, which aggregates interaction logs to periodically fine-tune query decomposition, retrieval, and generation models. By restoring human control over key stages of the generative AI search pipeline, we believe NExT-Search offers a promising direction for building feedback-rich AI search systems that can evolve continuously alongside human feedback.
Abstract:Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) have shown impressive capabilities in multi-step reasoning tasks. However, alongside these successes, a more deceptive form of model error has emerged--Reasoning Hallucination--where logically coherent but factually incorrect reasoning traces lead to persuasive yet faulty conclusions. Unlike traditional hallucinations, these errors are embedded within structured reasoning, making them more difficult to detect and potentially more harmful. In this work, we investigate reasoning hallucinations from a mechanistic perspective. We propose the Reasoning Score, which quantifies the depth of reasoning by measuring the divergence between logits obtained from projecting late layers of LRMs to the vocabulary space, effectively distinguishing shallow pattern-matching from genuine deep reasoning. Using this score, we conduct an in-depth analysis on the ReTruthQA dataset and identify two key reasoning hallucination patterns: early-stage fluctuation in reasoning depth and incorrect backtracking to flawed prior steps. These insights motivate our Reasoning Hallucination Detection (RHD) framework, which achieves state-of-the-art performance across multiple domains. To mitigate reasoning hallucinations, we further introduce GRPO-R, an enhanced reinforcement learning algorithm that incorporates step-level deep reasoning rewards via potential-based shaping. Our theoretical analysis establishes stronger generalization guarantees, and experiments demonstrate improved reasoning quality and reduced hallucination rates.
Abstract:We introduce the Learning Hyperplane Tree (LHT), a novel oblique decision tree model designed for expressive and interpretable classification. LHT fundamentally distinguishes itself through a non-iterative, statistically-driven approach to constructing splitting hyperplanes. Unlike methods that rely on iterative optimization or heuristics, LHT directly computes the hyperplane parameters, which are derived from feature weights based on the differences in feature expectations between classes within each node. This deterministic mechanism enables a direct and well-defined hyperplane construction process. Predictions leverage a unique piecewise linear membership function within leaf nodes, obtained via local least-squares fitting. We formally analyze the convergence of the LHT splitting process, ensuring that each split yields meaningful, non-empty partitions. Furthermore, we establish that the time complexity for building an LHT up to depth $d$ is $O(mnd)$, demonstrating the practical feasibility of constructing trees with powerful oblique splits using this methodology. The explicit feature weighting at each split provides inherent interpretability. Experimental results on benchmark datasets demonstrate LHT's competitive accuracy, positioning it as a practical, theoretically grounded, and interpretable alternative in the landscape of tree-based models. The implementation of the proposed method is available at https://github.com/Hongyi-Li-sz/LHT_model.
Abstract:Fairness is an increasingly important factor in re-ranking tasks. Prior work has identified a trade-off between ranking accuracy and item fairness. However, the underlying mechanisms are still not fully understood. An analogy can be drawn between re-ranking and the dynamics of economic transactions. The accuracy-fairness trade-off parallels the coupling of the commodity tax transfer process. Fairness considerations in re-ranking, similar to a commodity tax on suppliers, ultimately translate into a cost passed on to consumers. Analogously, item-side fairness constraints result in a decline in user-side accuracy. In economics, the extent to which commodity tax on the supplier (item fairness) transfers to commodity tax on users (accuracy loss) is formalized using the notion of elasticity. The re-ranking fairness-accuracy trade-off is similarly governed by the elasticity of utility between item groups. This insight underscores the limitations of current fair re-ranking evaluations, which often rely solely on a single fairness metric, hindering comprehensive assessment of fair re-ranking algorithms. Centered around the concept of elasticity, this work presents two significant contributions. We introduce the Elastic Fairness Curve (EF-Curve) as an evaluation framework. This framework enables a comparative analysis of algorithm performance across different elasticity levels, facilitating the selection of the most suitable approach. Furthermore, we propose ElasticRank, a fair re-ranking algorithm that employs elasticity calculations to adjust inter-item distances within a curved space. Experiments on three widely used ranking datasets demonstrate its effectiveness and efficiency.
Abstract:In multi-stakeholder recommender systems (RS), users and providers operate as two crucial and interdependent roles, whose interests must be well-balanced. Prior research, including our work BankFair, has demonstrated the importance of guaranteeing both provider fairness and user accuracy to meet their interests. However, when they balance the two objectives, another critical factor emerges in RS: individual fairness, which manifests as a significant disparity in individual recommendation accuracy, with some users receiving high accuracy while others are left with notably low accuracy. This oversight severely harms the interests of users and exacerbates social polarization. How to guarantee individual fairness while ensuring user accuracy and provider fairness remains an unsolved problem. To bridge this gap, in this paper, we propose our method BankFair+. Specifically, BankFair+ extends BankFair with two steps: (1) introducing a non-linear function from regret theory to ensure individual fairness while enhancing user accuracy; (2) formulating the re-ranking process as a regret-aware fuzzy programming problem to meet the interests of both individual user and provider, therefore balancing the trade-off between individual fairness and provider fairness. Experiments on two real-world recommendation datasets demonstrate that BankFair+ outperforms all baselines regarding individual fairness, user accuracy, and provider fairness.
Abstract:Modern commercial platforms typically offer both search and recommendation functionalities to serve diverse user needs, making joint modeling of these tasks an appealing direction. While prior work has shown that integrating search and recommendation can be mutually beneficial, it also reveals a performance trade-off: enhancements in one task often come at the expense of the other. This challenge arises from their distinct information requirements: search emphasizes semantic relevance between queries and items, whereas recommendation depends more on collaborative signals among users and items. Effectively addressing this trade-off requires tackling two key problems: (1) integrating both semantic and collaborative signals into item representations, and (2) guiding the model to distinguish and adapt to the unique demands of search and recommendation. The emergence of generative retrieval with Large Language Models (LLMs) presents new possibilities. This paradigm encodes items as identifiers and frames both search and recommendation as sequential generation tasks, offering the flexibility to leverage multiple identifiers and task-specific prompts. In light of this, we introduce GenSAR, a unified generative framework for balanced search and recommendation. Our approach designs dual-purpose identifiers and tailored training strategies to incorporate complementary signals and align with task-specific objectives. Experiments on both public and commercial datasets demonstrate that GenSAR effectively reduces the trade-off and achieves state-of-the-art performance on both tasks.
Abstract:Recently, there has been a growing trend in utilizing large language models (LLMs) for recommender systems, referred to as LLMRec. A notable approach within this trend is not to fine-tune these models directly but instead to leverage In-Context Learning (ICL) methods tailored for LLMRec, denoted as LLM-ICL Rec. Many contemporary techniques focus on harnessing ICL content to enhance LLMRec performance. However, optimizing LLMRec with ICL content presents unresolved challenges. Specifically, two key issues stand out: (1) the limited understanding of why using a few demonstrations without model fine-tuning can lead to better performance compared to zero-shot recommendations. (2) the lack of evaluation metrics for demonstrations in LLM-ICL Rec and the absence of the theoretical analysis and practical design for optimizing the generation of ICL content for recommendation contexts. To address these two main issues, we propose a theoretical model, the LLM-ICL Recommendation Equivalent Gradient Descent model (LRGD) in this paper, which connects recommendation generation with gradient descent dynamics. We demonstrate that the ICL inference process in LLM aligns with the training procedure of its dual model, producing token predictions equivalent to the dual model's testing outputs. Building on these theoretical insights, we propose an evaluation metric for assessing demonstration quality. We integrate perturbations and regularizations in LRGD to enhance the robustness of the recommender system. To further improve demonstration effectiveness, prevent performance collapse, and ensure long-term adaptability, we also propose a two-stage optimization process in practice. Extensive experiments and detailed analysis on three Amazon datasets validate the theoretical equivalence and support the effectiveness of our theoretical analysis and practical module design.
Abstract:Syllogistic reasoning is a fundamental aspect of legal decision-making, enabling logical conclusions by connecting general legal principles with specific case facts. Although existing large language models (LLMs) can generate responses to legal questions, they fail to perform explicit syllogistic reasoning, often producing implicit and unstructured answers that lack explainability and trustworthiness. To address this limitation, we propose SyLeR, a novel framework that empowers LLMs to engage in explicit syllogistic legal reasoning. SyLeR integrates a tree-structured hierarchical retrieval mechanism to effectively combine relevant legal statutes and precedent cases, forming comprehensive major premises. This is followed by a two-stage fine-tuning process: supervised fine-tuning warm-up establishes a foundational understanding of syllogistic reasoning, while reinforcement learning with a structure-aware reward mechanism refines the ability of the model to generate diverse logically sound and well-structured reasoning paths. We conducted extensive experiments across various dimensions, including in-domain and cross-domain user groups (legal laypersons and practitioners), multiple languages (Chinese and French), and different LLM backbones (legal-specific and open-domain LLMs). The results show that SyLeR significantly improves response accuracy and consistently delivers explicit, explainable, and trustworthy legal reasoning.