Personalized large language models (LLMs) adapt model behavior to individual users to enhance user satisfaction, yet personalization can inadvertently distort factual reasoning. We show that when personalized LLMs face factual queries, there exists a phenomenon where the model generates answers aligned with a user’s prior history rather than the objective truth, resulting in **personalization-induced hallucinations** that degrade factual reliability and may propagate incorrect beliefs, due to representational entanglement between personalization and factual representations. To address this issue, we propose **Factuality-Preserving Personalized Steering (FPPS)**, a lightweight inference-time approach that mitigates personalization-induced factual distortions while preserving personalized behavior. We further introduce **PFQABench**, the first benchmark designed to jointly evaluate factual and personalized question answering under personalization. Experiments across multiple LLM backbones and personalization methods show that FPPS substantially improves factual accuracy while maintaining personalized performance.

Tool-Integrated Reasoning (TIR) empowers large language models (LLMs) to tackle complex tasks by interleaving reasoning steps with external tool interactions. However, existing reinforcement learning methods typically rely on outcome- or trajectory-level rewards, assigning uniform advantages to all steps within a trajectory. This coarse-grained credit assignment fails to distinguish effective tool calls from redundant or erroneous ones, particularly in long-horizon multi-turn scenarios. To address this, we propose MatchTIR, a framework that introduces fine-grained supervision via bipartite matching-based turn-level reward assignment and dual-level advantage estimation. Specifically, we formulate credit assignment as a bipartite matching problem between predicted and ground-truth traces, utilizing two assignment strategies to derive dense turn-level rewards. Furthermore, to balance local step precision with global task success, we introduce a dual-level advantage estimation scheme that integrates turn-level and trajectory-level signals, assigning distinct advantage values to individual interaction turns. Extensive experiments on three benchmarks demonstrate the superiority of MatchTIR. Notably, our 4B model surpasses the majority of 8B competitors, particularly in long-horizon and multi-turn tasks. Our codes are available at https://anonymous.4open.science/r/MatchTIR.

In legal practice, judges apply the trichotomous dogmatics of criminal law, sequentially assessingthe elements of the offense, unlawfulness, and culpability to determine whether an individual’s conduct constitutes a crime. Although current legal large language models (LLMs) show promising accuracy in judgment prediction, they lack trichotomous reasoning capabilities due to the absence of an appropriate benchmark dataset, preventing them from predicting innocent outcomes. As a result, every input is automatically assigned a charge, limiting their practical utility in legal contexts. To bridge this gap, we introduce LJPIV, the first benchmark dataset for Legal Judgment Prediction with Innocent Verdicts. Adhering to the trichotomous dogmatics, we extend three widely-used legal datasets through LLM-based augmentation and manual verification. Our experiments with state-of-the-art legal LLMs and novel strategies that integrate trichotomous reasoning into zero-shot prompting and fine-tuning reveal: (1) current legal LLMs have significant room for improvement, with even the best models achieving an F1 score of less than 0.3 on LJPIV; and (2) our strategies notably enhance both in-domain and cross-domain judgment prediction accuracy, especially for cases resulting in an innocent verdict.

Query rewriting plays a pivotal role in Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) by refining real-world queries of varying complexity. Existing approaches typically rely on outcome-supervised training or heuristic rules to guide the rewriting process. However, these paradigms often struggle to handle queries with varying levels of complexity, posing over- and under-refinement problems. We identify the root cause of these issues as the absence of supervision signals for intermediate steps. To fully construct and utilize such signals, we propose Q-PRM, a novel query rewriting framework. Q-PRM reformulates the rewriting process as a Markov Decision Process (MDP) composed of atomic rewriting steps. In this way, Q-PRM can apply process-level supervision to each atomic step according to the query type, offering more targeted and effective guidance. Q-PRM comprises three key stages: (1) applying Monte Carlo Tree Search to generate step-level process supervision signals; (2) performing reinforced self-training for progressive process refinement; and (3) employing PRM-guided decoding during inference. Experiments on several open-domain QA benchmarks demonstrate that Q-PRM consistently outperforms baselines across different levels of query complexity.

Legal mathematical reasoning is essential for applying large language models (LLMs) in high-stakes legal contexts, where outputs must be both mathematically accurate and procedurally compliant. However, existing legal LLMs lack structured numerical reasoning, and open-domain models, though capable of calculations, often overlook mandatory legal steps. To address this, we present LexNum, the first Chinese legal mathematical reasoning benchmark, covering three representative scenarios where each instance reflects legally grounded procedural flows. We further propose LexPam, a two-stage reinforcement learning framework for efficient legal reasoning training. Leveraging curriculum learning, we use a stronger teacher model to partition data into basic and challenging subsets. A lightweight 1.5B student model is then fine-tuned with Group Relative Policy Optimization, which avoids costly value networks and enables stable training from sparse, end-of-sequence rewards. The first stage improves accuracy and format; the second introduces a novel reward to guide procedural alignment via task-specific legal elements. Experiments show that existing models perform poorly on LexNum, while LexPam enhances both mathematical accuracy and legal coherence, and generalizes effectively across tasks and domains.

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. Codes are available at https://github.com/E-qin/VAPS.

Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) has proven effective in enhancing the knowledge coverage of large language models (LLMs) and mitigating hallucinations by incorporating external retrieved documents. However, documents deemed relevant by the retriever are not necessarily helpful for answer generation, and including misleading information can even degrade performance. Existing efforts to estimate document utility often rely on the downstream generation performance, which conflates the influence of external documents with the intrinsic knowledge of the LLM, thereby obscuring the actual contribution of the retrieved content. To address this, this paper proposes Uplit-RAG, a uplift-driven knowledge preference alignment framework for RAG. Specifically, we first propose an uplift-based definition of document utility that quantifies each document’s marginal benefit over the LLM’s internal knowledge. We then optimize the reranker with three alignment objectives to identify and prioritize documents based on their uplift. This enables dynamic selection of documents that address the LLM’s knowledge gaps, going beyond fixed top-k selection, while reducing reference redundancy and the computational overhead of the LLM’s input. Extensive experiments demonstrate the effectiveness of Uplift-RAG.

Unlike traditional search engines that present ranked lists of webpages, generative search engines rely solely on in-line citations as the key gateway to original real-world webpages, making it crucial to examine whether LLM-generated citations have biases—particularly for politically sensitive queries. To investigate this, we first construct AllSides-2024, a new dataset comprising the latest real-world news articles (Jan. 2024 - Dec. 2024) labeled with left- or right-leaning stances. Through systematic evaluations, we find that LLMs exhibit a consistent tendency to cite left-leaning sources at notably higher rates compared to traditional retrieval systems (e.g., BM25 and dense retrievers). Controlled experiments further reveal that this bias arises from a preference for media outlets identified as left-leaning, rather than for left-oriented content itself. Meanwhile, our findings show that while LLMs struggle to infer political bias from news content alone, they can almost perfectly recognize the political orientation of media outlets based on their names. These insights highlight the risk that, in the era of generative search engines, information exposure may be disproportionately shaped by specific media outlets, potentially shaping public perception and decision-making.