Traditional sentence embedding methods employ token-level contrastive learning on non-generative pre-trained models. Recently, there have emerged embedding methods based on generative large language models (LLMs). These methods either rely on fixed prompt templates or involve modifications to the model architecture. The former lacks further optimization of the model and results in limited performance, while the latter alters the internal computational mechanisms of the model, thereby compromising its generative capabilities. We propose SemPA, a novel approach that boosts the sentence representations while preserving the generative ability of LLMs via semantic preference alignment. We leverage sentence-level Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) to efficiently optimize LLMs on a paraphrase generation task, where the model learns to discriminate semantically equivalent sentences while preserving inherent generative capacity. Theoretically, we establish a formal connection between DPO and contrastive learning under the Plackett-Luce model framework. Empirically, experimental results on both semantic textual similarity tasks and various benchmarks for LLMs show that SemPA achieves better semantic representations without sacrificing the inherent generation capability of LLMs.

Test-time reinforcement learning mitigates the reliance on annotated data by using majority voting results as pseudo-labels, emerging as a complementary direction to reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) for improving reasoning ability of large language models (LLMs). However, this voting strategy often induces confirmation bias and suffers from sparse rewards, limiting the overall performance. In this work, we propose subgroup-specific step-wise confidence-weighted pseudo-label estimation (SCOPE), a framework integrating model confidence and dynamic subgroup partitioning to address these issues. Specifically, SCOPE integrates the proposed step-wise confidence into pseudo-label estimation, prioritizing high-quality reasoning paths over simple frequency count. Furthermore, it dynamically partitions the candidate outputs pool into independent subgroups by balancing reasoning quality against exploration diversity. By deriving local consensus via repeat sampling for each subgroup, SCOPE provides diverse supervision targets to encourage broader exploration. We conduct experiments across various models and benchmarks, experimental results show that SCOPE consistently outperforms recent baselines. Notably, SCOPE achieves relative improvements of 13.1% on challenging AIME 2025 and 8.1% on AMC.

While large language models have achieved remarkable performance in complex tasks, they still need a memory system to utilize historical experience in long-term interactions. Existing memory methods (e.g., A-Mem, Mem0) place excessive emphasis on organizing interactions by frequently rewriting them, however, this heavy reliance on summarization risks diluting essential contextual nuances and obscuring key retrieval features. To bridge this gap, we introduce AnchorMem, a novel memory framework inspired by the Proust Phenomenon in cognitive science, where a specific anchor triggers a holistic recollection. We propose a method that decouples the retrieval unit from the generation context. AnchorMem extracts atomic facts from interaction history to serve as retrieval anchors, while preserving the original context as the immutable context. To reveal implicit narrative cues, we construct an associative event graph that uses higher-order event links that bind sets of related facts into shared event representations, strengthening cross-memory integration without relying on generic entities as bridges. During retrieval, the system anchors queries to specific facts and events to locate relevant memories, but reconstructs the context using the associated raw chunks and events. Our method reconciles fine-grained retrieval with the contextual integrity of interactions. Experiments across three closed-source and open-source models on the LoCoMo benchmark demonstrate that AnchorMem significantly outperforms baselines.

Majority voting is considered an effective method to enhance chain-of-thought reasoning, as it selects the answer with the highest ”self-consistency” among different reasoning paths (Wang et al., 2023). However, previous chain-of-thought reasoning methods typically generate only a single answer in each trial, thereby ignoring the possibility of other potential answers. As a result, these alternative answers are often overlooked in subsequent voting processes. In this work, we propose to generate ranked answers in each reasoning process and conduct ranked voting among multiple ranked answers from different responses, thereby making the overall self-consistency more reliable. Specifically, we use three ranked voting methods: Instant-runoff voting, Borda count voting, and mean reciprocal rank voting. We validate our methods on six datasets, including three multiple-choice and three open-ended question-answering tasks, using both advanced open-source and closed-source large language models. Extensive experimental results indicate that our proposed method outperforms the baselines, showcasing the potential of leveraging the information of ranked answers and using ranked voting to improve reasoning performance. Code and logs will be released.

In attempts to develop sample-efficient and interpretable algorithms, researcher have explored myriad mechanisms for collecting and exploiting feature feedback, auxiliary annotations provided for training (but not test) instances that highlight salient evidence. Examples include bounding boxes around objects and salient spans in text. Despite its intuitive appeal, feature feedback has not delivered significant gains in practical problems as assessed on iid holdout sets. However, recent works on counterfactually augmented data suggest an alternative benefit of supplemental annotations, beyond interpretability: lessening sensitivity to spurious patterns and consequently delivering gains in out-of-domain evaluations. We speculate that while existing methods for incorporating feature feedback have delivered negligible in-sample performance gains, they may nevertheless provide out-of-domain benefits. Our experiments addressing sentiment analysis, show that feature feedback methods perform significantly better on various natural out-of-domain datasets despite comparable in-domain evaluations. By contrast, performance on natural language inference remains comparable. Finally, we compare those tasks where feature feedback does (and does not) help.