Geographic reasoning is a fundamental cognitive capability that requires models to infer plausible locations by synthesizing visual evidence with spatial world knowledge. Despite recent advances in large vision-language models (LVLMs), existing evaluation paradigms remain largely outcome-centric, relying on static datasets and predefined labels that are conceptually misaligned with open-world geographic inference. Such outcome-centric evaluations often focus exclusively on label matching, leaving the underlying linguistic reasoning chains as unexamined black boxes. In this work, we introduce GeoArena, a dynamic, human-preference-based evaluation framework for benchmarking open-world geographic reasoning. GeoArena reframes evaluation as a pairwise reasoning alignment task on in-the-wild images, where human judges compare model-generated explanations based on reasoning quality, evidence synthesis, and plausibility. We deploy GeoArena as a public platform and benchmark 17 frontier LVLMs using thousands of human judgments, which complements existing benchmarks and supports the development of geographically grounded, human-aligned AI systems. We further provide detailed analyses of model behavior, including reliability of human preferences and factors influencing judgments of geographic reasoning quality. We open-source GeoArena to foster future research.

Uncertainty quantification (UQ) for large language models (LLMs) is a key building block for safety guardrails of daily LLM applications. Yet, even as LLM agents are increasingly deployed in highly complex tasks, most UQ research still centers on single-turn question-answering. We argue that UQ research must shift to realistic settings with interactive agents, and that a new principled framework for agent UQ is needed. This paper presents three pillars to build a solid ground for future agent UQ research: (1. Foundations) We present the first general formulation of agent UQ that subsumes broad classes of existing UQ setups; (2. Challenges) We identify four technical challenges specifically tied to agentic setups—selection of uncertainty estimator, uncertainty of heterogeneous entities, modeling uncertainty dynamics in interactive systems, and lack of fine-grained benchmarks—with numerical analysis on a real-world agent benchmark, 𝜏²-bench; (3. Future Directions) We conclude with noting on the practical implications of agent UQ and remaining open problems as forward-looking discussion for future explorations.

Selecting a single high-quality output from multiple stochastic generations remains a fundamental challenge for large language models (LLMs), particularly in open-ended tasks where no canonical answer exists. While Best-of-N and self-consistency methods show that aggregating multiple generations can improve performance, existing approaches typically rely on external evaluators, reward models, or exact string-match voting, limiting their applicability and efficiency. We propose Mode Extraction (ModeX), an evaluator-free Best-of-N selection framework that generalizes majority voting to open-ended text generation by identifying the modal output representing the dominant semantic consensus among generated texts. ModeX constructs a similarity graph over candidate generations and recursively applies spectral clustering to select a representative centroid, without requiring additional inference or auxiliary models. We further instantiate this selection principle as ModeX Decoding, a drop-in decoding scheme with early pruning for efficiency. Across open-ended tasks—including text summarization, code generation, and mathematical reasoning—our approaches consistently outperform standard single- and multi-path baselines, providing a computationally efficient, drop-in solution for robust open-ended text generation.

Multi-agent debate (MAD) aims to improve large language model (LLM) reasoning by letting multiple agents exchange answers and then aggregate their opinions. Yet recent studies reveal that agents are not neutral: they are prone to identity-driven sycophancy and self-bias, uncritically adopting a peer’s view or stubbornly adhering to their own prior output, undermining the reliability of debate. In this work, we present the first principled framework that joins sycophancy and self-bias to mitigate and quantify identity bias in MAD. First, we formalize the debate dynamics as an identity-weighted Bayesian update process. Second, we propose response anonymization: by removing identity markers from prompts, agents cannot distinguish "self" from "peer", which forces equal weights on agent identity, thereby reducing bias and improving trustworthiness. Third, we define the Identity Bias Coefficient (IBC), a principled bias metric that measures an agent’s tendency to follow its peer versus itself. Empirical studies across multiple models and benchmarks confirm that identity bias is widespread, with sycophancy far more common than self-bias. Our findings highlight the need to ensure that MAD systems reason based on content rather than identity.

In-context learning (ICL) enables models to adapt to new tasks via inference-time demonstrations. Despite its success in large language models, the extension of ICL to multimodal settings remains poorly understood in terms of its internal mechanisms and how it differs from text-only ICL. In this work, we conduct a systematic analysis of ICL in multimodal large language models. Using identical task formulations across modalities, we show that multimodal ICL performs comparably to text-only ICL in zero-shot settings but degrades significantly under few-shot demonstrations. To understand this gap, we decompose multimodal ICL into task mapping construction and task mapping transfer, and analyze how models establish cross-modal task mappings, and transfer them to query samples across layers. Our analysis reveals that current models lack reasoning-level alignment between visual and textual representations, and fail to reliably transfer learned task mappings to queries. Guided by these findings, we further propose a simple inference-stage enhancement method that reinforces task mapping transfer. Our results provide new insights into the mechanisms and limitations of multimodal ICL and suggest directions for more effective multimodal adaptation.