The remarkable reasoning and generalization capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) have paved the way for their expanding applications in embodied AI, robotics, and other real-world tasks. To effectively support these applications, grounding in spatial and temporal understanding in multimodal environments is essential. To this end, recent works have leveraged scene graphs, a structured representation that encodes entities, attributes, and their relationships in a scene. However, a comprehensive evaluation of LLMs’ ability to utilize scene graphs remains limited. In this work, we introduce Text-Scene Graph (TSG) Bench, a benchmark designed to systematically assess LLMs’ ability to (1) understand scene graphs and (2) generate them from textual narratives. With TSG Bench we evaluate 11 LLMs and reveal that, while models perform well on scene graph understanding, they struggle with scene graph generation, particularly for complex narratives. Our analysis indicates that these models fail to effectively decompose discrete scenes from a complex narrative, leading to a bottleneck when generating scene graphs. These findings underscore the need for improved methodologies in scene graph generation and provide valuable insights for future research. The demonstration of our benchmark is available at https://tsg-bench.netlify.app. Additionally, our code and evaluation data are publicly available at https://github.com/docworlds/tsg-bench.

With the release of R1, a publicly available large reasoning model (LRM), researchers commonly train new LRMs by training language models on R1’s long chain-of-thought (CoT) inferences. While prior works show that LRMs’ capabilities can be reproduced through direct distillation, the continued reliance on the existing models (e.g., R1) remains a critical limitation in advancing the field.As a first step toward independent LRM development, this paper explores the possibility of constructing a long CoT dataset with LLMs that are not trained for inference-time scaling.To this end, we present the Long CoT Collection, a dataset of 100K CoT rationales annotated using existing short CoT LLMs. We develop a pipeline that induces o1’s novel reasoning strategies into short CoT LLMs, enabling them to think longer and introducing controllability over the thought budget to better manage the overthinking problem.Our extensive analyses validate that our dataset achieves quality comparable to—or slightly below—R1. Furthermore, our experiments demonstrate that training on our dataset not only strengthens general reasoning skills, but also provides a strong foundation for reinforcement learning—models initialized on our data achieve 2-3x larger gains with RLVR. We make the codes, datasets, and models publicly available at LINK.

Recent advancements in Large Language Models (LLMs) have led to their adaptation in various domains as conversational agents. We wonder: can personality tests be applied to these agents to analyze their behavior, similar to humans? We introduce TRAIT, a new benchmark consisting of 8K multi-choice questions designed to assess the personality of LLMs. TRAIT is built on two psychometrically validated small human questionnaires, Big Five Inventory (BFI) and Short Dark Triad (SD-3), enhanced with the ATOMIC-10X knowledge graph to a variety of real-world scenarios. TRAIT also outperforms existing personality tests for LLMs in terms of reliability and validity, achieving the highest scores across four key metrics: Content Validity, Internal Validity, Refusal Rate, and Reliability. Using TRAIT, we reveal two notable insights into personalities of LLMs: 1) LLMs exhibit distinct and consistent personality, which is highly influenced by their training data (e.g., data used for alignment tuning), and 2) current prompting techniques have limited effectiveness in eliciting certain traits, such as high psychopathy or low conscientiousness, suggesting the need for further research in this direction.

Understanding clients’ thoughts and beliefs is fundamental in counseling, yet current evaluations of LLM therapists often fail to assess this ability. Existing evaluation methods rely on client simulators that clearly disclose internal states to the therapist, making it difficult to determine whether an LLM therapist can uncover unexpressed perspectives. To address this limitation, we introduce MindVoyager, a novel evaluation framework featuring a controllable and realistic client simulator which dynamically adapts itself based on the ongoing counseling session, offering a more realistic and challenging evaluation environment. We further introduce evaluation metrics that assess the exploration ability of LLM therapists by measuring their thorough understanding of client’s beliefs and thoughts.

Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated strong capabilities in using external tools to address user inquiries. However, most existing evaluations assume tool use in short contexts, offering limited insight into model behavior during realistic long-term interactions. To fill this gap, we introduce ToolHaystack, a benchmark for testing the tool use capabilities in long-term interactions. Each test instance in ToolHaystack includes multiple tasks execution contexts and realistic noise within a continuous conversation, enabling assessment of how well models maintain context and handle various disruptions. By applying this benchmark to 14 state-of-the-art LLMs, we find that while current models perform well in standard multi-turn settings, they often significantly struggle in ToolHaystack, highlighting critical gaps in their long-term robustness not revealed by previous tool benchmarks.

Algorithmic reasoning tasks that involve complex logical patterns, such as completing Dyck language, pose challenges for large language models (LLMs), despite their recent success. Prior work has used LLMs to generate programming language and applied external compilers for such tasks. Yet, when on the fly, it is hard to generate an executable code with the correct logic for the solution. Even so, code for one instance cannot be reused for others, although they might require the same logic to solve. We present Think-and-Execute, a novel framework that improves LLMs’ algorithmic reasoning: (1) In Think, we discover task-level logic shared across all instances, and express such logic with pseudocode; (2) In Execute, we tailor the task-level pseudocode to each instance and simulate the execution of it. Think-and-Execute outperforms several strong baselines (including CoT and PoT) in diverse algorithmic reasoning tasks. We manifest the advantage of using task-level pseudocode over generating instance-specific solutions one by one. Also, we show that pseudocode can better improve LMs’ reasoning than natural language (NL) guidance, even though they are trained with NL instructions.

This paper presents Coffee-Gym, a comprehensive RL environment for training models that provide feedback on code editing. Coffee-Gym includes two major components: (1) Coffee, a dataset containing humans’ code edit traces for coding questions and human-written feedback for editing erroneous code; (2) CoffeeEval, a reward function that faithfully reflects the helpfulness of feedback by assessing the performance of the revised code in unit tests. With them, Coffee-Gym addresses the unavailability of high-quality datasets for training feedback models with RL, and provides more accurate rewards than the SOTA reward model (i.e., GPT-4). By applying Coffee-Gym, we elicit feedback models that outperform baselines in enhancing open-source code LLMs’ code editing, making them comparable with closed-source LLMs. We make the dataset and the model checkpoint publicly available in https://huggingface.co/spaces/Coffee-Gym/Project-Coffee-Gym.

Conversational recommender systems are an emerging area that has garnered increasing interest in the community, especially with the advancements in large language models (LLMs) that enable sophisticated handling of conversational input. Despite the progress, the field still has many aspects left to explore. The currently available public datasets for conversational recommendation lack specific user preferences and explanations for recommendations, hindering high-quality recommendations. To address such challenges, we present a novel conversational recommendation dataset named PEARL, synthesized with persona- and knowledge-augmented LLM simulators. We obtain detailed persona and knowledge from real-world reviews and construct a large-scale dataset with over 57k dialogues. Our experimental results demonstrate that PEARL contains more specific user preferences, show expertise in the target domain, and provides recommendations more relevant to the dialogue context than those in prior datasets. Furthermore, we demonstrate the utility of PEARL by showing that our downstream models outperform baselines in both human and automatic evaluations. We release our dataset and code.

Commonsense reasoning systems should be able to generalize to diverse reasoning cases. However, most state-of-the-art approaches depend on expensive data annotations and overfit to a specific benchmark without learning how to perform general semantic reasoning. To overcome these drawbacks, zero-shot QA systems have shown promise as a robust learning scheme by transforming a commonsense knowledge graph (KG) into synthetic QA-form samples for model training. Considering the increasing type of different commonsense KGs, this paper aims to extend the zero-shot transfer learning scenario into multiple-source settings, where different KGs can be utilized synergetically. Towards this goal, we propose to mitigate the loss of knowledge from the interference among the different knowledge sources, by developing a modular variant of the knowledge aggregation as a new zero-shot commonsense reasoning framework. Results on five commonsense reasoning benchmarks demonstrate the efficacy of our framework, improving the performance with multiple KGs.