Abstract:Reinforcement Learning (RL) has demonstrated its potential to improve the reasoning ability of Large Language Models (LLMs). One major limitation of most existing Reinforcement Finetuning (RFT) methods is that they are on-policy RL in nature, i.e., data generated during the past learning process is not fully utilized. This inevitably comes at a significant cost of compute and time, posing a stringent bottleneck on continuing economic and efficient scaling. To this end, we launch the renaissance of off-policy RL and propose Reincarnating Mix-policy Proximal Policy Gradient (ReMix), a general approach to enable on-policy RFT methods like PPO and GRPO to leverage off-policy data. ReMix consists of three major components: (1) Mix-policy proximal policy gradient with an increased Update-To-Data (UTD) ratio for efficient training; (2) KL-Convex policy constraint to balance the trade-off between stability and flexibility; (3) Policy reincarnation to achieve a seamless transition from efficient early-stage learning to steady asymptotic improvement. In our experiments, we train a series of ReMix models upon PPO, GRPO and 1.5B, 7B base models. ReMix shows an average Pass@1 accuracy of 52.10% (for 1.5B model) with 0.079M response rollouts, 350 training steps and achieves 63.27%/64.39% (for 7B model) with 0.007M/0.011M response rollouts, 50/75 training steps, on five math reasoning benchmarks (i.e., AIME'24, AMC'23, Minerva, OlympiadBench, and MATH500). Compared with 15 recent advanced models, ReMix shows SOTA-level performance with an over 30x to 450x reduction in training cost in terms of rollout data volume. In addition, we reveal insightful findings via multifaceted analysis, including the implicit preference for shorter responses due to the Whipping Effect of off-policy discrepancy, the collapse mode of self-reflection behavior under the presence of severe off-policyness, etc.
Abstract:As proprietary giants increasingly dominate the race for ever-larger language models, a pressing question arises for the open-source community: can smaller models remain competitive across a broad range of tasks? In this paper, we present the Avengers--a simple recipe that effectively leverages the collective intelligence of open-source, smaller language models. Our framework is built upon four lightweight operations: (i) embedding: encode queries using a text embedding model; (ii) clustering: group queries based on their semantic similarity; (iii) scoring: scores each model's performance within each cluster; and (iv) voting: improve outputs via repeated sampling and voting. At inference time, each query is embedded and assigned to its nearest cluster. The top-performing model(s) within that cluster are selected to generate the response using the Self-Consistency or its multi-model variant. Remarkably, with 10 open-source models (~7B parameters each), the Avengers collectively outperforms GPT-4.1 on 10 out of 15 datasets (spanning mathematics, code, logic, knowledge, and affective tasks). In particular, it surpasses GPT-4.1 on mathematics tasks by 18.21% and on code tasks by 7.46%. Furthermore, the Avengers delivers superior out-of-distribution generalization, and remains robust across various embedding models, clustering algorithms, ensemble strategies, and values of its sole parameter--the number of clusters. We have open-sourced the code on GitHub: https://github.com/ZhangYiqun018/Avengers
Abstract:With more open-source models available for diverse tasks, model merging has gained attention by combining models into one, reducing training, storage, and inference costs. Current research mainly focuses on model merging for full fine-tuning, overlooking the popular LoRA. However, our empirical analysis reveals that: a) existing merging methods designed for full fine-tuning perform poorly on LoRA; b) LoRA modules show much larger parameter magnitude variance than full fine-tuned weights; c) greater parameter magnitude variance correlates with worse merging performance. Considering that large magnitude variances cause deviations in the distribution of the merged parameters, resulting in information loss and performance degradation, we propose a Decoupled and Orthogonal merging approach(DO-Merging). By separating parameters into magnitude and direction components and merging them independently, we reduce the impact of magnitude differences on the directional alignment of the merged models, thereby preserving task information. Furthermore, we introduce a data-free, layer-wise gradient descent method with orthogonal constraints to mitigate interference during the merging of direction components. We provide theoretical guarantees for both the decoupling and orthogonal components. And we validate through extensive experiments across vision, language, and multi-modal domains that our proposed DO-Merging can achieve significantly higher performance than existing merging methods at a minimal cost. Notably, each component can be flexibly integrated with existing methods, offering near free-lunch improvements across tasks.
Abstract:The tragedy of the commons, where individual self-interest leads to collectively disastrous outcomes, is a pervasive challenge in human society. Recent studies have demonstrated that similar phenomena can arise in generative multi-agent systems (MASs). To address this challenge, this paper explores the use of reputation systems as a remedy. We propose RepuNet, a dynamic, dual-level reputation framework that models both agent-level reputation dynamics and system-level network evolution. Specifically, driven by direct interactions and indirect gossip, agents form reputations for both themselves and their peers, and decide whether to connect or disconnect other agents for future interactions. Through two distinct scenarios, we show that RepuNet effectively mitigates the 'tragedy of the commons', promoting and sustaining cooperation in generative MASs. Moreover, we find that reputation systems can give rise to rich emergent behaviors in generative MASs, such as the formation of cooperative clusters, the social isolation of exploitative agents, and the preference for sharing positive gossip rather than negative ones.
Abstract:Reasoning is the fundamental capability of large language models (LLMs). Due to the rapid progress of LLMs, there are two main issues of current benchmarks: i) these benchmarks can be crushed in a short time (less than 1 year), and ii) these benchmarks may be easily hacked. To handle these issues, we propose the ever-scalingness for building the benchmarks which are uncrushable, unhackable, auto-verifiable and general. This paper presents Nondeterministic Polynomial-time Problem Challenge (NPPC), an ever-scaling reasoning benchmark for LLMs. Specifically, the NPPC has three main modules: i) npgym, which provides a unified interface of 25 well-known NP-complete problems and can generate any number of instances with any levels of complexities, ii) npsolver: which provides a unified interface to evaluate the problem instances with both online and offline models via APIs and local deployments, respectively, and iii) npeval: which provides the comprehensive and ready-to-use tools to analyze the performances of LLMs over different problems, the number of tokens, the aha moments, the reasoning errors and the solution errors. Extensive experiments over widely-used LLMs demonstrate: i) NPPC can successfully decrease the performances of advanced LLMs' performances to below 10%, demonstrating that NPPC is uncrushable, ii) DeepSeek-R1, Claude-3.7-Sonnet, and o1/o3-mini are the most powerful LLMs, where DeepSeek-R1 outperforms Claude-3.7-Sonnet and o1/o3-mini in most NP-complete problems considered, and iii) the numbers of tokens, aha moments in the advanced LLMs, e.g., Claude-3.7-Sonnet and DeepSeek-R1, are observed first to increase and then decrease when the problem instances become more and more difficult. We believe that NPPC is the first ever-scaling reasoning benchmark, serving as the uncrushable and unhackable testbed for LLMs toward artificial general intelligence (AGI).
Abstract:This paper presents a simple, effective, and cost-efficient strategy to improve LLM performance by scaling test-time compute. Our strategy builds upon the repeated-sampling-then-voting framework, with a novel twist: incorporating multiple models, even weaker ones, to leverage their complementary strengths that potentially arise from diverse training data and paradigms. By using consistency as a signal, our strategy dynamically switches between models. Theoretical analysis highlights the efficiency and performance advantages of our strategy. Extensive experiments on six datasets demonstrate that our strategy not only outperforms self-consistency and state-of-the-art multi-agent debate approaches, but also significantly reduces inference costs. Additionally, ModelSwitch requires only a few comparable LLMs to achieve optimal performance and can be extended with verification methods, demonstrating the potential of leveraging multiple LLMs in the generation-verification paradigm.
Abstract:Recent research on Reasoning of Large Language Models (LLMs) has sought to further enhance their performance by integrating meta-thinking -- enabling models to monitor, evaluate, and control their reasoning processes for more adaptive and effective problem-solving. However, current single-agent work lacks a specialized design for acquiring meta-thinking, resulting in low efficacy. To address this challenge, we introduce Reinforced Meta-thinking Agents (ReMA), a novel framework that leverages Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning (MARL) to elicit meta-thinking behaviors, encouraging LLMs to think about thinking. ReMA decouples the reasoning process into two hierarchical agents: a high-level meta-thinking agent responsible for generating strategic oversight and plans, and a low-level reasoning agent for detailed executions. Through iterative reinforcement learning with aligned objectives, these agents explore and learn collaboration, leading to improved generalization and robustness. Experimental results demonstrate that ReMA outperforms single-agent RL baselines on complex reasoning tasks, including competitive-level mathematical benchmarks and LLM-as-a-Judge benchmarks. Comprehensive ablation studies further illustrate the evolving dynamics of each distinct agent, providing valuable insights into how the meta-thinking reasoning process enhances the reasoning capabilities of LLMs.
Abstract:Evolution, the engine behind the survival and growth of life on Earth, operates through the population-based process of reproduction. Inspired by this principle, this paper formally defines a newly emerging problem -- the population-based evolution of large language models (LLMs) -- and introduces a novel framework. Starting with a population of parent LLMs, our framework enables the population to evolve through four key operations: (i) crossover, merging the weights of different parents to create offspring LLMs, (ii) mutation, introducing small, random changes to model weights to foster diversity, (iii) selection, prioritizing high-performing models, and (iv) succession, transferring the learned experience from parent to offspring LLMs. With only 200 samples per new task, the LLM population evolves rapidly to adapt to the task at hand, without any gradients. Experiments on 12 datasets show that our framework consistently outperforms existing multi-LLM merging and adaptation methods, achieving accuracy gains of up to 54.8% over the best LLM in the initial population. Moreover, our framework allows for the evolution of LLMs across multiple new tasks simultaneously, scaling effectively with populations of up to 40 LLMs, and even zero-shot generalization to unseen held-out tasks. We have open-sourced the code on GitHub and released the weights of 10 parent LLMs, fine-tuned from gemma-2-2b-it, on HuggingFace$, enabling reproduction of our proposed framework using just a single 4090 GPU with 24GB memory, without any performance degradation.
Abstract:Multi-agent debate (MAD) has emerged as a promising approach to enhance the factual accuracy and reasoning quality of large language models (LLMs) by engaging multiple agents in iterative discussions during inference. Despite its potential, we argue that current MAD research suffers from critical shortcomings in evaluation practices, including limited dataset overlap and inconsistent baselines, raising significant concerns about generalizability. Correspondingly, this paper presents a systematic evaluation of five representative MAD methods across nine benchmarks using four foundational models. Surprisingly, our findings reveal that MAD methods fail to reliably outperform simple single-agent baselines such as Chain-of-Thought and Self-Consistency, even when consuming additional inference-time computation. From our analysis, we found that model heterogeneity can significantly improve MAD frameworks. We propose Heter-MAD enabling a single LLM agent to access the output from heterogeneous foundation models, which boosts the performance of current MAD frameworks. Finally, we outline potential directions for advancing MAD, aiming to spark a broader conversation and inspire future work in this area.
Abstract:The past two years have witnessed the evolution of large language model (LLM)-based multi-agent systems from labor-intensive manual design to partial automation (\textit{e.g.}, prompt engineering, communication topology) and eventually to fully automated design. However, existing agentic automation pipelines often lack LLM heterogeneity and focus on single-objective performance optimization, limiting their potential to combine weaker models for more customized and cost-effective solutions. To address this challenge, we propose EvoFlow, a niching evolutionary algorithm-based framework to automatically search a population of heterogeneous and complexity-adaptive agentic workflows, rather than a single homogeneous, complex workflow. Technically, EvoFlow performs \textit{(1) tag-based retrieval} to extract parent workflows from an agentic population, evolves new workflows through \textit{(2) crossover} and \textit{(3) mutation}, and employs \textit{(4) niching-based selection} to maintain population diversity and quality. Extensive evaluations across seven benchmarks demonstrate that EvoFlow is: \textbf{(I) diverse}, evolving a population of workflows ranging from simple I/O tasks to complex multi-turn interactions; \textbf{(II) high-performing}, outperforming previous handcrafted and automated workflows by $1.23\%\sim29.86\%$; \textbf{(III) economical}, surpassing powerful \llmname{o1-preview} at $12.4\%$ of its inference cost using weaker open-source models.