Recent advancements have expanded the role of Large Language Models (LLMs) in board games from playing agents to creative co-designers. However, a critical gap remains: current systems lack the capacity to offer constructive critique grounded in the emergent user experience. Bridging this gap is fundamental for harmonizing Human-AI collaboration, as it empowers designers to refine their creations via external perspectives while steering models away from biased or unpredictable outcomes. Automating this evaluation presents two challenges: inferring the latent dynamics connecting static rules to gameplay without an explicit engine, and modeling the subjective heterogeneity of diverse player groups. To address these, we curate a comprehensive dataset of 1,727 structurally corrected rulebooks and 150K reviews selected via rigorous quality scoring and facet-aware sampling. We augment this data with Mechanics-Dynamics-Aesthetics (MDA) reasoning to explicitly bridge the causal gap between written rules and player experience. We further distill distinct player personas and introduce MeepleLM, a specialized model that internalizes persona-specific reasoning patterns to accurately simulate the subjective feedback of diverse player archetypes. Extensive experiments demonstrate that MeepleLM significantly outperforms latest commercial models (e.g., GPT-5.1, Gemini3-Pro) in community alignment and critique quality, achieving a 70% preference rate in user studies assessing practical utility. MeepleLM serves as a reliable virtual playtester that provides experience-grounded feedback, offering a practical step towards audience-aligned Human-AI collaboration.

Recent progress in large language models (LLMs) has boosted mathematical reasoning, yet geometry remains challenging where auxiliary construction is often essential. Prior methods either underperform or depend on very large models (e.g., GPT-4o), making them costly. We argue that reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (e.g., GRPO) can train smaller models to couple auxiliary construction with solid geometric reasoning. However, naively applying GRPO yields unconditional rewards, encouraging indiscriminate and sometimes harmful constructions. We propose Group Contrastive Policy Optimization (GCPO), an RL framework with two components: (1) Group Contrastive Masking, which assigns positive/negative construction rewards based on contextual utility, and (2) a Length Reward that encourages longer reasoning chains. On top of GCPO, we build GeometryZero, an affordable family of geometry reasoning models that selectively use auxiliary construction. Experiments on Geometry3K and MathVista show GeometryZero consistently outperforms RL baselines (e.g., GRPO, ToRL).

LLMs have shown strong performance on human-centric reasoning tasks. While previous evaluations have explored whether LLMs can infer intentions or detect deception, they often overlook the individualized reasoning styles that influence how people interpret and act in social contexts. Social deduction games (SDGs) provide a natural testbed for evaluating individualized reasoning styles, where different players may adopt diverse but contextually valid reasoning strategies under identical conditions. To address this, we introduce InMind, a cognitively grounded evaluation framework designed to assess whether LLMs can capture and apply personalized reasoning styles in SDGs. InMind enhances structured gameplay data with round-level strategy traces and post-game reflections, collected under both Observer and Participant modes. It supports four cognitively motivated tasks that jointly evaluate both static alignment and dynamic adaptation. As a case study, we apply InMind to the game Avalon, evaluating 11 state-of-the-art LLMs. General-purpose LLMs, even GPT-4o frequently rely on lexical cues, struggling to anchor reflections in temporal gameplay or adapt to evolving strategies. In contrast, reasoning-enhanced LLMs like DeepSeek-R1 exhibit early signs of style-sensitive reasoning. These findings reveal key limitations in current LLMs’ capacity for individualized, adaptive reasoning, and position InMind as a step toward cognitively aligned human–AI interaction.

The efficient compression of large language models (LLMs) has become increasingly popular. However, recovering the performance of compressed LLMs remains a major challenge. The current practice in LLM compression entails the implementation of structural pruning, complemented by a recovery phase that leverages the Low-Rank Adaptation (LoRA) algorithm. Structural pruning’s uneven modification of model architecture, coupled with standard LoRA’s fixed configuration allocation across layers in an online pipeline, leads to suboptimal performance in various downstream tasks for pruned models. To address this challenge, we introduce RankAdaptor, a hierarchical rank allocation method that enables efficient fine-tuning of pruned LLMs according to layerwise specific recovery requirements. We employ a performance model that conducts offline meta-learning and online incremental learning to explore optimal rank values for each layer. Comprehensive experiments on popular benchmarks show that RankAdaptor consistently outperforms state-of-the-art methods across a variety of pruning settings and LLM architectures, with improvements ranging from 0.7% to 5.5%.

The rise of large language models (LLMs) has significantly advanced various natural language processing (NLP) tasks. However, the resource demands of these models pose substantial challenges. Structured pruning is an effective approach to reducing model size, but it often results in significant accuracy degradation, necessitating parameter updates to adapt. Unfortunately, such fine-tuning requires substantial memory, which limits its applicability. To address these challenges, we introduce quantization into the structured pruning framework to reduce memory consumption during both fine-tuning and inference. However, the combined errors from pruning and quantization increase the difficulty of fine-tuning, requiring a more refined quantization scheme. To this end, we propose QPruner, a novel framework that employs structured pruning to reduce model size, followed by a layer-wise mixed-precision quantization scheme. Quantization precisions are assigned to each layer based on their importance to the target task, and Bayesian optimization is employed to refine precision allocation strategies, ensuring a balance between model accuracy and memory efficiency. Extensive experiments on benchmark datasets demonstrate that QPruner significantly outperforms existing methods in memory savings while maintaining or improving model performance.