Decoupled Mixture-of-Experts for Parametric Knowledge Injection

Knowledge injection aims to equip large language models (LLMs) with external, domain-specific, or time-sensitive knowledge. Existing approaches typically face a trade-off between flexibility and integration: retrieval-augmented generation keeps knowledge outside the model but only provides prompt-level augmentation, whereas post-training based methods encode new knowledge into shared parameters but may introduce catastrophic forgetting, knowledge conflict, and costly updates. In this paper, we propose Decoupled Mixture-of-Experts (DMoE), a modular architecture for parametric knowledge injection that decouples both experts and the router from the base model. DMoE converts external knowledge corpora into independently updatable expert modules and uses a lightweight uncertainty-aware router to activate relevant experts only when the base model lacks sufficient knowledge during generation. To support efficient auto-regressive inference, DMoE attaches experts only to the final-layer feed-forward network, preserving KV-cache reuse while enabling parameter-level knowledge augmentation. Experiments on knowledge-intensive benchmarks show that DMoE consistently improves answer quality over retrieval and adapter-based baselines.

Adaptive Multi-Resolution Procedural Knowledge Compression for Large Language Models

Large language models (LLMs) are widely used to tackle complex tasks with autonomous workflows. Recently, reusable natural language skills have emerged as a popular paradigm to inject procedural knowledge into LLM applications. Since popular skills are often invoked repeatedly, placing their full text in every context significantly increases prefill cost and latency. While text compression techniques have the potential to solve this problem, most existing methods are designed to compress factual knowledge in documents instead of procedural knowledge, making them insufficient for skill compression. In this paper, we argue that an effective skill compression method should: 1) preserve logical dependencies among workflows and tool protocols, 2) enable lightweight, offline compression for frequently updated community skills, and 3) be adaptable to varying complexities across skills. To address this, we present SKIM (SKIll coMpression), an adaptive multi-resolution soft token compression framework for procedural skills. Depending on the complexity of each skill, SKIM creates different numbers of soft tokens that not only improve the efficiency of LLM inference, but also preserve the effectiveness of skill usage. Experiments indicate that SKIM compresses skills to 30 to 60 percent of their original token length while preserving task performance better than existing compression methods.We have released our code at https://github.com/bebr2/SKIM .

Benchmarking LLM-as-a-Judge for Long-Form Output Evaluation

As large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used for long-form generation, reliably evaluating long-form outputs has become a critical challenge. LLM-as-a-judge offers a scalable alternative to human evaluation, yet its reliability in long-form output evaluation remains underexamined: existing meta-evaluation benchmarks focus mainly on short-form outputs. Compared with short-form evaluation, long-form evaluation is not merely a matter of output length; it often requires judges to handle more complex document-level demands. In this work, we introduce LongJudgeBench, a comprehensive benchmark for evaluating LLM judges on long-form outputs across diverse real-world scenarios and judging protocols. We systematically evaluate a broad range of LLM judges, covering multiple base models and judging settings. Our results reveal a substantial reliability gap: current LLM judges remain unstable across scenarios, and rubrics or references are helpful but not always sufficient. We hope LongJudgeBench will support future research on more robust, context-aware, and human-aligned LLM-as-a-judge methods. Our code is available at https://anonymous.4open.science/r/LongJudgeBench-F782.

Enhancing Judgment Document Generation via Agentic Legal Information Collection and Rubric-Guided Optimization

Automating the drafting of judgment documents is pivotal to judicial efficiency, yet it remains challenging due to the dual requirements of comprehensive retrieval of legal information and rigorous logical reasoning. Existing approaches, typically relying on standard Retrieval-Augmented Generation and Supervised Fine-Tuning, often suffer from insufficient evidence recall, hallucinated statutory references, and logically flawed legal reasoning. To bridge this gap, we propose Judge-R1, a unified framework designed to enhance LLM-based judgment document generation by jointly improving legal information collection and judgment document generation. First, we introduce Agentic Legal Information Collection, which employs a dynamic planning agent to retrieve precise statutes and precedents from multiple sources. Second, we implement Rubric-Guided Optimization, a reinforcement learning phase utilizing Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO) with a comprehensive legal reward function to enforce adherence to judicial standards and reasoning logic. Extensive experiments on the JuDGE benchmark demonstrate that Judge-R1 significantly outperforms state-of-the-art baselines in both legal accuracy and generation quality.

Skill Retrieval Augmentation for Agentic AI

As large language models (LLMs) evolve into agentic problem solvers, they increasingly rely on external, reusable skills to handle tasks beyond their native parametric capabilities. In existing agent systems, the dominant strategy for incorporating skills is to explicitly enumerate available skills within the context window. However, this strategy fails to scale: as skill corpora expand, context budgets are consumed rapidly, and the agent becomes markedly less accurate in identifying the right skill. To this end, this paper formulates Skill Retrieval Augmentation (SRA), a new paradigm in which agents dynamically retrieve, incorporate, and apply relevant skills from large external skill corpora on demand. To make this problem measurable, we construct a large-scale skill corpus and introduce SRA-Bench, the first benchmark for decomposed evaluation of the full SRA pipeline, covering skill retrieval, skill incorporation, and end-task execution. SRA-Bench contains 5,400 capability-intensive test instances and 636 manually constructed gold skills, which are mixed with web-collected distractor skills to form a large-scale corpus of 26,262 skills. Extensive experiments show that retrieval-based skill augmentation can substantially improve agent performance, validating the promise of the paradigm. At the same time, we uncover a fundamental gap in skill incorporation: current LLM agents tend to load skills at similar rates, regardless of whether a gold skill is retrieved or whether the task actually requires external capabilities. This shows that the bottleneck in skill augmentation lies not only in retrieval but also in the base model's ability to determine which skill to load and when external loading is actually needed. These findings position SRA as a distinct research problem and establish a foundation for the scalable augmentation of capabilities in future agent systems.

Analytical Search

Analytical information needs, such as trend analysis and causal impact assessment, are prevalent across various domains including law, finance, science, and much more. However, existing information retrieval paradigms, whether based on relevance-oriented document ranking or retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) with large language models (LLMs), often struggle to meet the end-to-end requirements of such tasks at the corpus scale. They either emphasize information finding rather than end-to-end problem solving, or simply treat everything as naive question answering, offering limited control over reasoning, evidence usage, and verifiability. As a result, they struggle to support analytical queries that have diverse utility concepts and high accountability requirements. In this paper, we propose analytical search as a distinct and emerging search paradigm designed to fulfill these analytical information needs. Analytical search reframes search as an evidence-governed, process-oriented analytical workflow that explicitly models analytical intent, retrieves evidence for fusion, and produces verifiable conclusions through structured, multi-step inference. We position analytical search in contrast to existing paradigms, and present a unified system framework that integrates query understanding, recall-oriented retrieval, reasoning-aware fusion, and adaptive verification. We also discuss potential research directions for the construction of analytical search engines. In this way, we highlight the conceptual significance and practical importance of analytical search and call on efforts toward the next generation of search engines that support analytical information needs.

Improve Large Language Model Systems with User Logs

Scaling training data and model parameters has long driven progress in large language models (LLMs), but this paradigm is increasingly constrained by the scarcity of high-quality data and diminishing returns from rising computational costs. As a result, recent work is increasing the focus on continual learning from real-world deployment, where user interaction logs provide a rich source of authentic human feedback and procedural knowledge. However, learning from user logs is challenging due to their unstructured and noisy nature. Vanilla LLM systems often struggle to distinguish useful feedback signals from noisy user behavior, and the disparity between user log collection and model optimization (e.g., the off-policy optimization problem) further strengthens the problem. To this end, we propose UNO (User log-driveN Optimization), a unified framework for improving LLM systems (LLMsys) with user logs. UNO first distills logs into semi-structured rules and preference pairs, then employs query-and-feedback-driven clustering to manage data heterogeneity, and finally quantifies the cognitive gap between the model's prior knowledge and the log data. This assessment guides the LLMsys to adaptively filter out noisy feedback and construct different modules for primary and reflective experiences extracted from user logs, thereby improving future responses. Extensive experiments show that UNO achieves state-of-the-art effectiveness and efficiency, significantly outperforming Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG) and memory-based baselines. We have open-sourced our code at https://github.com/bebr2/UNO .

Multi-Field Tool Retrieval

Integrating external tools enables Large Language Models (LLMs) to interact with real-world environments and solve complex tasks. Given the growing scale of available tools, effective tool retrieval is essential to mitigate constraints of LLMs' context windows and ensure computational efficiency. Existing approaches typically treat tool retrieval as a traditional ad-hoc retrieval task, matching user queries against the entire raw tool documentation. In this paper, we identify three fundamental challenges that limit the effectiveness of this paradigm: (i) the incompleteness and structural inconsistency of tool documentation; (ii) the significant semantic and granular mismatch between user queries and technical tool documents; and, most importantly, (iii) the multi-aspect nature of tool utility, that involves distinct dimensions, such as functionality, input constraints, and output formats, varying in format and importance. To address these challenges, we introduce Multi-Field Tool Retrieval, a framework designed to align user intent with tool representations through fine-grained, multi-field modeling. Experimental results show that our framework achieves SOTA performance on five datasets and a mixed benchmark, exhibiting superior generalizability and robustness.

Equity vs. Equality: Optimizing Ranking Fairness for Tailored Provider Needs

Ranking plays a central role in connecting users and providers in Information Retrieval (IR) systems, making provider-side fairness an important challenge. While recent research has begun to address fairness in ranking, most existing approaches adopt an equality-based perspective, aiming to ensure that providers with similar content receive similar exposure. However, it overlooks the diverse needs of real-world providers, whose utility from ranking may depend not only on exposure but also on outcomes like sales or engagement. Consequently, exposure-based fairness may not accurately capture the true utility perceived by different providers with varying priorities. To this end, we introduce an equity-oriented fairness framework that explicitly models each provider's preferences over key outcomes such as exposure and sales, thus evaluating whether a ranking algorithm can fulfill these individualized goals while maintaining overall fairness across providers. Based on this framework, we develop EquityRank, a gradient-based algorithm that jointly optimizes user-side effectiveness and provider-side equity. Extensive offline and online simulations demonstrate that EquityRank offers improved trade-offs between effectiveness and fairness and adapts to heterogeneous provider needs.

Evaluation of Large Language Models in Legal Applications: Challenges, Methods, and Future Directions

Large language models (LLMs) are being increasingly integrated into legal applications, including judicial decision support, legal practice assistance, and public-facing legal services. While LLMs show strong potential in handling legal knowledge and tasks, their deployment in real-world legal settings raises critical concerns beyond surface-level accuracy, involving the soundness of legal reasoning processes and trustworthy issues such as fairness and reliability. Systematic evaluation of LLM performance in legal tasks has therefore become essential for their responsible adoption. This survey identifies key challenges in evaluating LLMs for legal tasks grounded in real-world legal practice. We analyze the major difficulties involved in assessing LLM performance in the legal domain, including outcome correctness, reasoning reliability, and trustworthiness. Building on these challenges, we review and categorize existing evaluation methods and benchmarks according to their task design, datasets, and evaluation metrics. We further discuss the extent to which current approaches address these challenges, highlight their limitations, and outline future research directions toward more realistic, reliable, and legally grounded evaluation frameworks for LLMs in legal domains.