World Modeling Makes a Better Planner: Dual Preference Optimization for Embodied Task Planning

Recent advances in large vision-language models (LVLMs) have shown promise for embodied task planning, yet they struggle with fundamental challenges like dependency constraints and efficiency. Existing approaches either solely optimize action selection or leverage world models during inference, overlooking the benefits of learning to model the world as a way to enhance planning capabilities. We propose Dual Preference Optimization (D$^2$PO), a new learning framework that jointly optimizes state prediction and action selection through preference learning, enabling LVLMs to understand environment dynamics for better planning. To automatically collect trajectories and stepwise preference data without human annotation, we introduce a tree search mechanism for extensive exploration via trial-and-error. Extensive experiments on VoTa-Bench demonstrate that our D$^2$PO-based method significantly outperforms existing methods and GPT-4o when applied to Qwen2-VL (7B), LLaVA-1.6 (7B), and LLaMA-3.2 (11B), achieving superior task success rates with more efficient execution paths.

How to Mitigate Overfitting in Weak-to-strong Generalization?

Aligning powerful AI models on tasks that surpass human evaluation capabilities is the central problem of \textbf{superalignment}. To address this problem, weak-to-strong generalization aims to elicit the capabilities of strong models through weak supervisors and ensure that the behavior of strong models aligns with the intentions of weak supervisors without unsafe behaviors such as deception. Although weak-to-strong generalization exhibiting certain generalization capabilities, strong models exhibit significant overfitting in weak-to-strong generalization: Due to the strong fit ability of strong models, erroneous labels from weak supervisors may lead to overfitting in strong models. In addition, simply filtering out incorrect labels may lead to a degeneration in question quality, resulting in a weak generalization ability of strong models on hard questions. To mitigate overfitting in weak-to-strong generalization, we propose a two-stage framework that simultaneously improves the quality of supervision signals and the quality of input questions. Experimental results in three series of large language models and two mathematical benchmarks demonstrate that our framework significantly improves PGR compared to naive weak-to-strong generalization, even achieving up to 100\% PGR on some models.

AutoLogi: Automated Generation of Logic Puzzles for Evaluating Reasoning Abilities of Large Language Models

While logical reasoning evaluation of Large Language Models (LLMs) has attracted significant attention, existing benchmarks predominantly rely on multiple-choice formats that are vulnerable to random guessing, leading to overestimated performance and substantial performance fluctuations. To obtain more accurate assessments of models' reasoning capabilities, we propose an automated method for synthesizing open-ended logic puzzles, and use it to develop a bilingual benchmark, AutoLogi. Our approach features program-based verification and controllable difficulty levels, enabling more reliable evaluation that better distinguishes models' reasoning abilities. Extensive evaluation of eight modern LLMs shows that AutoLogi can better reflect true model capabilities, with performance scores spanning from 35% to 73% compared to the narrower range of 21% to 37% on the source multiple-choice dataset. Beyond benchmark creation, this synthesis method can generate high-quality training data by incorporating program verifiers into the rejection sampling process, enabling systematic enhancement of LLMs' reasoning capabilities across diverse datasets.

Revisiting the Test-Time Scaling of o1-like Models: Do they Truly Possess Test-Time Scaling Capabilities?

The advent of test-time scaling in large language models (LLMs), exemplified by OpenAI's o1 series, has advanced reasoning capabilities by scaling computational resource allocation during inference. While successors like QwQ, Deepseek-R1 (R1) and LIMO replicate these advancements, whether these models truly possess test-time scaling capabilities remains underexplored. This study found that longer CoTs of these o1-like models do not consistently enhance accuracy; in fact, correct solutions are often shorter than incorrect ones for the same questions. Further investigation shows this phenomenon is closely related to models' self-revision capabilities - longer CoTs contain more self-revisions, which often lead to performance degradation. We then compare sequential and parallel scaling strategies on QwQ, R1 and LIMO, finding that parallel scaling achieves better coverage and scalability. Based on these insights, we propose Shortest Majority Vote, a method that combines parallel scaling strategies with CoT length characteristics, significantly improving models' test-time scalability compared to conventional majority voting approaches.

Scaling of Search and Learning: A Roadmap to Reproduce o1 from Reinforcement Learning Perspective

OpenAI o1 represents a significant milestone in Artificial Inteiligence, which achieves expert-level performances on many challanging tasks that require strong reasoning ability.OpenAI has claimed that the main techinique behinds o1 is the reinforcement learining. Recent works use alternative approaches like knowledge distillation to imitate o1's reasoning style, but their effectiveness is limited by the capability ceiling of the teacher model. Therefore, this paper analyzes the roadmap to achieving o1 from the perspective of reinforcement learning, focusing on four key components: policy initialization, reward design, search, and learning. Policy initialization enables models to develop human-like reasoning behaviors, equipping them with the ability to effectively explore solution spaces for complex problems. Reward design provides dense and effective signals via reward shaping or reward modeling, which is the guidance for both search and learning. Search plays a crucial role in generating high-quality solutions during both training and testing phases, which can produce better solutions with more computation. Learning utilizes the data generated by search for improving policy, which can achieve the better performance with more parameters and more searched data. Existing open-source projects that attempt to reproduce o1 can be seem as a part or a variant of our roadmap. Collectively, these components underscore how learning and search drive o1's advancement, making meaningful contributions to the development of LLM.

Case2Code: Learning Inductive Reasoning with Synthetic Data

Complex reasoning is an impressive ability shown by large language models (LLMs). Most LLMs are skilled in deductive reasoning, such as chain-of-thought prompting or iterative tool-using to solve challenging tasks step-by-step. In this paper, we hope to focus on evaluating and teaching LLMs to conduct inductive reasoning, that is, LLMs are supposed to infer underlying rules by observing examples or sequential transformations. However, collecting large-scale and diverse human-generated inductive data is challenging. We focus on data synthesis in the code domain and propose a \textbf{Case2Code} task by exploiting the expressiveness and correctness of programs. Specifically, we collect a diverse set of executable programs, synthesize input-output transformations for each program, and force LLMs to infer the underlying code implementations based on the synthetic I/O cases. We first evaluate representative LLMs on the synthesized Case2Code task and demonstrate that the Case-to-code induction is challenging for LLMs. Then, we synthesize large-scale Case2Code training samples to train LLMs to perform inductive reasoning. Experimental results show that such induction training benefits not only in distribution Case2Code performance but also enhances various coding abilities of trained LLMs, demonstrating the great potential of learning inductive reasoning via synthetic data.

Scaling Laws for Fact Memorization of Large Language Models

Fact knowledge memorization is crucial for Large Language Models (LLM) to generate factual and reliable responses. However, the behaviors of LLM fact memorization remain under-explored. In this paper, we analyze the scaling laws for LLM's fact knowledge and LLMs' behaviors of memorizing different types of facts. We find that LLMs' fact knowledge capacity has a linear and negative exponential law relationship with model size and training epochs, respectively. Estimated by the built scaling law, memorizing the whole Wikidata's facts requires training an LLM with 1000B non-embed parameters for 100 epochs, suggesting that using LLMs to memorize all public facts is almost implausible for a general pre-training setting. Meanwhile, we find that LLMs can generalize on unseen fact knowledge and its scaling law is similar to general pre-training. Additionally, we analyze the compatibility and preference of LLMs' fact memorization. For compatibility, we find LLMs struggle with memorizing redundant facts in a unified way. Only when correlated facts have the same direction and structure, the LLM can compatibly memorize them. This shows the inefficiency of LLM memorization for redundant facts. For preference, the LLM pays more attention to memorizing more frequent and difficult facts, and the subsequent facts can overwrite prior facts' memorization, which significantly hinders low-frequency facts memorization. Our findings reveal the capacity and characteristics of LLMs' fact knowledge learning, which provide directions for LLMs' fact knowledge augmentation.

Cross-Modality Safety Alignment

As Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) becomes increasingly integrated into various facets of human life, ensuring the safety and ethical alignment of such systems is paramount. Previous studies primarily focus on single-modality threats, which may not suffice given the integrated and complex nature of cross-modality interactions. We introduce a novel safety alignment challenge called Safe Inputs but Unsafe Output (SIUO) to evaluate cross-modality safety alignment. Specifically, it considers cases where single modalities are safe independently but could potentially lead to unsafe or unethical outputs when combined. To empirically investigate this problem, we developed the SIUO, a cross-modality benchmark encompassing 9 critical safety domains, such as self-harm, illegal activities, and privacy violations. Our findings reveal substantial safety vulnerabilities in both closed- and open-source LVLMs, such as GPT-4V and LLaVA, underscoring the inadequacy of current models to reliably interpret and respond to complex, real-world scenarios.

Unified Active Retrieval for Retrieval Augmented Generation

In Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG), retrieval is not always helpful and applying it to every instruction is sub-optimal. Therefore, determining whether to retrieve is crucial for RAG, which is usually referred to as Active Retrieval. However, existing active retrieval methods face two challenges: 1. They usually rely on a single criterion, which struggles with handling various types of instructions. 2. They depend on specialized and highly differentiated procedures, and thus combining them makes the RAG system more complicated and leads to higher response latency. To address these challenges, we propose Unified Active Retrieval (UAR). UAR contains four orthogonal criteria and casts them into plug-and-play classification tasks, which achieves multifaceted retrieval timing judgements with negligible extra inference cost. We further introduce the Unified Active Retrieval Criteria (UAR-Criteria), designed to process diverse active retrieval scenarios through a standardized procedure. Experiments on four representative types of user instructions show that UAR significantly outperforms existing work on the retrieval timing judgement and the performance of downstream tasks, which shows the effectiveness of UAR and its helpfulness to downstream tasks.

Aggregation of Reasoning: A Hierarchical Framework for Enhancing Answer Selection in Large Language Models

Recent advancements in Chain-of-Thought prompting have facilitated significant breakthroughs for Large Language Models (LLMs) in complex reasoning tasks. Current research enhances the reasoning performance of LLMs by sampling multiple reasoning chains and ensembling based on the answer frequency. However, this approach fails in scenarios where the correct answers are in the minority. We identify this as a primary factor constraining the reasoning capabilities of LLMs, a limitation that cannot be resolved solely based on the predicted answers. To address this shortcoming, we introduce a hierarchical reasoning aggregation framework AoR (Aggregation of Reasoning), which selects answers based on the evaluation of reasoning chains. Additionally, AoR incorporates dynamic sampling, adjusting the number of reasoning chains in accordance with the complexity of the task. Experimental results on a series of complex reasoning tasks show that AoR outperforms prominent ensemble methods. Further analysis reveals that AoR not only adapts various LLMs but also achieves a superior performance ceiling when compared to current methods.