As large language models (LLMs) increasingly tackle complex reasoning tasks, test-time scaling has become critical for enhancing capabilities. However, in agentic scenarios with frequent tool calls, the traditional generation-length-based definition breaks down: tool latency decouples inference time from generation length. We propose Timely Machine, redefining test-time as wall-clock time, where models dynamically adjust strategies based on time budgets. We introduce Timely-Eval, a benchmark spanning high-frequency tool calls, low-frequency tool calls, and time-constrained reasoning. By varying tool latency, we find smaller models excel with fast feedback through more interactions, while larger models dominate high-latency settings via superior interaction quality. Moreover, existing models fail to adapt reasoning to time budgets. We propose Timely-RL to address this gap. After cold-start supervised fine-tuning, we use reinforcement learning to enhance temporal planning. Timely-RL improves time budget awareness and consistently boosts performance across Timely-Eval. We hope our work offers a new perspective on test-time scaling for the agentic era.

The safe deployment of large language models (LLMs) necessitates comprehensive safety evaluations through red teaming. However, existing methods face challenges in managing semantic intricacies and optimizing the efficiency of the search process. To overcome these limitations, we propose Better Red Teaming (BRT)—an innovative framework that reconceptualizes test case generation as a strategic planning problem, leveraging Monte Carlo Tree Search (MCTS). A notable advancement of our approach is the incorporation of LLMs as world models, enabling the prediction of state transitions and simulation of long-term outcomes throughout the search process. By jointly optimizing objectives related to conditional mutual information and diversity, we improve the world model’s capacity to follow actions while maintaining output diversity. Extensive experiments conducted across a range of LLM architectures demonstrate that BRT achieves state-of-the-art attack success rates without sacrificing computational efficiency.

The responsible deployment of Large Language Models (LLMs) necessitates rigorous safety evaluations. However, a critical challenge arises from inconsistencies between an LLM’s internal refusal decisions and external safety assessments, hindering effective validation. This paper introduces the concept of the ‘refusal gap’ to formally define these discrepancies. We then present a novel, refusal-aware red teaming framework designed to automatically generate test cases that expose such gaps. Our framework employs ‘refusal probes’, which leverage the target model’s hidden states, to detect internal model refusals. These are subsequently contrasted with judgments from an external safety evaluator. The identified discrepancy serves as a signal to guide a red-teaming model in crafting test cases that maximize this refusal gap. To further enhance test case diversity and address challenges related to sparse rewards, we introduce a hierarchical, curiosity-driven mechanism that incentivizes both refusal gap maximization and broad topic exploration. Empirical results demonstrate that our method significantly outperforms existing reinforcement learning-based approaches in generating diverse test cases and achieves a substantially higher discovery rate of refusal gaps.