AgentCE-Bench: Agent Configurable Evaluation with Scalable Horizons and Controllable Difficulty under Lightweight Environments

Existing Agent benchmarks suffer from two critical limitations: high environment interaction overhead (up to 41\% of total evaluation time) and imbalanced task horizon and difficulty distributions that make aggregate scores unreliable. To address these issues, we propose AgentCE-Bench built around a unified grid-based planning task, where agents must fill hidden slots in a partially completed schedule subject to both local slot constraints and global constraints. Our benchmark offers fine-grained control through two orthogonal axes: \textbf{Scalable Horizons}, controlled by the number of hidden slots $H$, and \textbf{Controllable Difficulty}, governed by a decoy budget $B$ that determines the number of globally misleading decoy candidates. Crucially, all tool calls are resolved via static JSON files under a \textbf{Lightweight Environment} design, eliminating setup overhead and enabling fast, reproducible evaluation suitable for training-time validation. We first validate that $H$ and $B$ provide reliable control over task horizon and difficulty, and that AgentCE-Bench exhibits strong domain consistency and model discriminability. We then conduct comprehensive experiments across 13 models of diverse sizes and families over 6 domains, revealing significant cross-model performance variation and confirming that AgentCE-Bench provides interpretable and controllable evaluation of agent reasoning.

Demystifying OPD: Length Inflation and Stabilization Strategies for Large Language Models

On-policy distillation (OPD) trains student models under their own induced distribution while leveraging supervision from stronger teachers. We identify a failure mode of OPD: as training progresses, on-policy rollouts can undergo abrupt length inflation, causing truncated trajectories to dominate the training data. This truncation collapse coincides with abrupt repetition saturation and induces biased gradient signals, leading to severe training instability and sharp degradation in validation performance. We attribute this problem to the interaction between student-induced data collection and the distillation objective, which implicitly favors long and repetitive rollouts. To address this issue, we propose StableOPD, a stabilized OPD framework that combines a reference-based divergence constraint with rollout mixture distillation. These together mitigate repetition-induced length inflation and further stabilize OPD training. Across multiple math reasoning datasets, our approach prevents truncation collapse, stabilizes training dynamics, and improves performance by 7.2% on average.

ACE-Bench: Agent Configurable Evaluation with Scalable Horizons and Controllable Difficulty under Lightweight Environments

Existing Agent benchmarks suffer from two critical limitations: high environment interaction overhead (up to 41\% of total evaluation time) and imbalanced task horizon and difficulty distributions that make aggregate scores unreliable. To address these issues, we propose ACE-Bench built around a unified grid-based planning task, where agents must fill hidden slots in a partially completed schedule subject to both local slot constraints and global constraints. Our benchmark offers fine-grained control through two orthogonal axes: Scalable Horizons, controlled by the number of hidden slots $H$, and Controllable Difficulty, governed by a decoy budget $B$ that determines the number of globally misleading decoy candidates. Crucially, all tool calls are resolved via static JSON files under a Lightweight Environment design, eliminating setup overhead and enabling fast, reproducible evaluation suitable for training-time validation. We first validate that H and B provide reliable control over task horizon and difficulty, and that ACE-Bench exhibits strong domain consistency and model discriminability. We then conduct comprehensive experiments across 13 models of diverse sizes and families over 6 domains, revealing significant cross-model performance variation and confirming that ACE-Bench provides interpretable and controllable evaluation of agent reasoning.

Rethinking Exploration in RLVR: From Entropy Regularization to Refinement via Bidirectional Entropy Modulation

Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) has significantly advanced the reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs). However, it faces a fundamental limitation termed \textit{restricted exploration}, where the policy rapidly converges to a narrow set of solutions. While entropy regularization is a popular approach used to sustain exploration, it often proves unreliable for LLMs, suffering from high hyperparameter sensitivity and yielding only marginal performance gains. Motivated by these inefficiencies, we propose to rethink the relationship between policy entropy and exploration. By deriving a parametric formulation of group-relative advantage estimation and analyzing entropy dynamics, we conceptually decompose policy entropy into \textit{informative entropy}, which preserves diverse solution paths, and \textit{spurious entropy}, which erodes reasoning patterns. Our analysis reveals that, in contrast to blind maximization, effective exploration requires \textit{entropy refinement}-a mechanism implicitly embedded in group-relative advantage estimation that sustains informative entropy on positive rollouts while suppressing spurious entropy on negative ones. Guided by this insight, we propose \textbf{AsymGRPO}, an exploratory framework that explicitly decouples the modulation of positive and negative rollouts. This allows for independent control over the preservation of informative entropy and the suppression of spurious noise. Extensive experiments demonstrate that AsymGRPO achieves superior performance compared to strong baselines and exhibits the potential to synergize with existing entropy regularization methods.

ERNIE 5.0 Technical Report

In this report, we introduce ERNIE 5.0, a natively autoregressive foundation model desinged for unified multimodal understanding and generation across text, image, video, and audio. All modalities are trained from scratch under a unified next-group-of-tokens prediction objective, based on an ultra-sparse mixture-of-experts (MoE) architecture with modality-agnostic expert routing. To address practical challenges in large-scale deployment under diverse resource constraints, ERNIE 5.0 adopts a novel elastic training paradigm. Within a single pre-training run, the model learns a family of sub-models with varying depths, expert capacities, and routing sparsity, enabling flexible trade-offs among performance, model size, and inference latency in memory- or time-constrained scenarios. Moreover, we systematically address the challenges of scaling reinforcement learning to unified foundation models, thereby guaranteeing efficient and stable post-training under ultra-sparse MoE architectures and diverse multimodal settings. Extensive experiments demonstrate that ERNIE 5.0 achieves strong and balanced performance across multiple modalities. To the best of our knowledge, among publicly disclosed models, ERNIE 5.0 represents the first production-scale realization of a trillion-parameter unified autoregressive model that supports both multimodal understanding and generation. To facilitate further research, we present detailed visualizations of modality-agnostic expert routing in the unified model, alongside comprehensive empirical analysis of elastic training, aiming to offer profound insights to the community.

When Domains Interact: Asymmetric and Order-Sensitive Cross-Domain Effects in Reinforcement Learning for Reasoning

Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO) has become a key technique for improving reasoning abilities in large language models, yet its behavior under different domain sequencing strategies is poorly understood. In particular, the impact of sequential (one domain at a time) versus mixed-domain (multiple domain at a time) training in GRPO has not been systematically studied. We provide the first systematic analysis of training-order effects across math, science, logic, and puzzle reasoning tasks. We found (1) single-domain generalization is highly asymmetric: training on other domains improves math reasoning by approximately 25\% accuracy, while yielding negligible transfer to logic and puzzle; (2) cross-domain interactions are highly order-dependent: training in the order math$\rightarrow$science achieves 83\% / 41\% accuracy on math / science, while reversing the order to science$\rightarrow$math degrades performance to 77\% / 25\%; (3) no single strategy is universally optimal in multi-domain training: sequential training favors math (up to 84\%), mixed training favors science and logic, and poor ordering can incur large performance gaps (from 70\% to 56\%). Overall, our findings demonstrate that GRPO under multi-domain settings exhibits pronounced asymmetry, order sensitivity, and strategy dependence, highlighting the necessity of domain-aware and order-aware training design.

Mid-Think: Training-Free Intermediate-Budget Reasoning via Token-Level Triggers

Hybrid reasoning language models are commonly controlled through high-level Think/No-think instructions to regulate reasoning behavior, yet we found that such mode switching is largely driven by a small set of trigger tokens rather than the instructions themselves. Through attention analysis and controlled prompting experiments, we show that a leading ``Okay'' token induces reasoning behavior, while the newline pattern following ``</think>'' suppresses it. Based on this observation, we propose Mid-Think, a simple training-free prompting format that combines these triggers to achieve intermediate-budget reasoning, consistently outperforming fixed-token and prompt-based baselines in terms of the accuracy-length trade-off. Furthermore, applying Mid-Think to RL training after SFT reduces training time by approximately 15% while improving final performance of Qwen3-8B on AIME from 69.8% to 72.4% and on GPQA from 58.5% to 61.1%, demonstrating its effectiveness for both inference-time control and RL-based reasoning training.

Demystifying Hybrid Thinking: Can LLMs Truly Switch Between Think and No-Think?

Hybrid thinking enables LLMs to switch between reasoning and direct answering, offering a balance between efficiency and reasoning capability. Yet our experiments reveal that current hybrid thinking LLMs only achieve partial mode separation: reasoning behaviors often leak into the no-think mode. To understand and mitigate this, we analyze the factors influencing controllability and identify four that matter most: (1) larger data scale, (2) using think and no-think answers from different questions rather than the same question, (3) a moderate increase in no-think data number, and (4) a two-phase strategy that first trains reasoning ability and then applies hybrid think training. Building on these findings, we propose a practical recipe that, compared to standard training, can maintain accuracy in both modes while significantly reducing no-think output length (from $1085$ to $585$ on MATH500) and occurrences of reasoning-supportive tokens such as ``\texttt{wait}'' (from $5917$ to $522$ on MATH500). Our findings highlight the limitations of current hybrid thinking and offer directions for strengthening its controllability.

Quantized but Deceptive? A Multi-Dimensional Truthfulness Evaluation of Quantized LLMs

Quantization enables efficient deployment of large language models (LLMs) in resource-constrained environments by significantly reducing memory and computation costs. While quantized LLMs often maintain performance on perplexity and zero-shot tasks, their impact on truthfulness-whether generating truthful or deceptive responses-remains largely unexplored. In this work, we introduce TruthfulnessEval, a comprehensive evaluation framework for assessing the truthfulness of quantized LLMs across three dimensions: (1) Truthfulness on Logical Reasoning; (2) Truthfulness on Common Sense; and (3) Truthfulness on Imitative Falsehoods. Using this framework, we examine mainstream quantization techniques (ranging from 4-bit to extreme 2-bit) across several open-source LLMs. Surprisingly, we find that while quantized models retain internally truthful representations, they are more susceptible to producing false outputs under misleading prompts. To probe this vulnerability, we test 15 rephrased variants of "honest", "neutral" and "deceptive" prompts and observe that "deceptive" prompts can override truth-consistent behavior, whereas "honest" and "neutral" prompts maintain stable outputs. Further, we reveal that quantized models "know" the truth internally yet still produce false outputs when guided by "deceptive" prompts via layer-wise probing and PCA visualizations. Our findings provide insights into future designs of quantization-aware alignment and truthfulness interventions.

When Truthful Representations Flip Under Deceptive Instructions?

Large language models (LLMs) tend to follow maliciously crafted instructions to generate deceptive responses, posing safety challenges. How deceptive instructions alter the internal representations of LLM compared to truthful ones remains poorly understood beyond output analysis. To bridge this gap, we investigate when and how these representations ``flip'', such as from truthful to deceptive, under deceptive versus truthful/neutral instructions. Analyzing the internal representations of Llama-3.1-8B-Instruct and Gemma-2-9B-Instruct on a factual verification task, we find the model's instructed True/False output is predictable via linear probes across all conditions based on the internal representation. Further, we use Sparse Autoencoders (SAEs) to show that the Deceptive instructions induce significant representational shifts compared to Truthful/Neutral representations (which are similar), concentrated in early-to-mid layers and detectable even on complex datasets. We also identify specific SAE features highly sensitive to deceptive instruction and use targeted visualizations to confirm distinct truthful/deceptive representational subspaces. % Our analysis pinpoints layer-wise and feature-level correlates of instructed dishonesty, offering insights for LLM detection and control. Our findings expose feature- and layer-level signatures of deception, offering new insights for detecting and mitigating instructed dishonesty in LLMs.