We present PricingLogic, the first benchmarkthat probes whether Large Language Mod-els (LLMs) can reliably automate tourism-booking prices when multiple, overlapping farerules apply. Travel agencies are eager to of-fload this error-prone task to AI systems; how-ever, deploying LLMs without verified reliabil-ity could result in significant financial lossesand erode customer trust. PricingLogic com-prises 300 natural-language questions based onbooking requests derived from 42 real-worldpricing policies, spanning two levels of diffi-culty: (i) basic customer-type pricing and (ii)bundled-tour calculations involving interactingdiscounts. Evaluations of a line of LLMs re-veal a steep performance drop on the harder tier,exposing systematic failures in rule interpreta-tion and arithmetic reasoning. These resultshighlight that, despite their general capabilities,today’s LLMs remain unreliable for revenue-critical applications without further safeguardsor domain adaptation. Our code and dataset areavaliable in https://github.com/EIT-NLP/PricingLogic.

Large Language Models (LLMs) excel in reasoning tasks through Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting. However, CoT prompting greatly increases computational demands, which has prompted growing interest in distilling CoT capabilities into Small Language Models (SLMs). This study systematically examines the factors influencing CoT distillation, including the choice of granularity, format and teacher model. Through experiments involving four teacher models and seven student models across seven mathematical and commonsense reasoning datasets, we uncover three key findings: (1) Unlike LLMs, SLMs exhibit a *non-monotonic* relationship with granularity, with stronger models benefiting from finer-grained reasoning and weaker models performing better with simpler CoT supervision; (2) CoT format significantly impacts LLMs but has *minimal* effect on SLMs, likely due to their reliance on supervised fine-tuning rather than pretraining preferences; (3) Stronger teacher models do *NOT* always produce better student models, as diversity and complexity in CoT supervision can outweigh accuracy alone. These findings emphasize the need to tailor CoT strategies to specific student model, offering actionable insights for optimizing CoT distillation in SLMs.

The development of autonomous agents increasingly relies on Multimodal Language Models (MLMs) to perform tasks described in natural language with GUI environments, such as websites, desktop computers, or mobile phones. Existing benchmarks for MLM agents in interactive environments are limited by their focus on a single environment, lack of detailed and generalized evaluation methods, and thecomplexities of constructing tasks and evaluators. To overcome these limitations, we introduce CRAB, the first cross-environment agent benchmark framework, incorporating a graph-based fine-grained evaluation method and an efficient task generation method. Our framework supports multiple devices and can be easily extended to any environment with a Python interface. Leveraging CRAB, we develope CRAB Benchmark-v0 comprising 120 tasks in computer desktop and mobile phone environments. We evaluated 6 advanced MLMs using different single and multi-agent system configurations on this benchmark. The experimental results demonstrate that the single agent with GPT-4o achieves the best completion ratio of 38.01%.

Large language models (LLMs) have excelled in various NLP tasks, including machine translation (MT), yet most studies focus on sentence-level translation. This work investigates the inherent capability of instruction-tuned LLMs for document-level translation (docMT). Unlike prior approaches that require specialized techniques, we evaluate LLMs by directly prompting them to translate entire documents in a single pass. Our results show that this method improves translation quality compared to translating sentences separately, even without document-level fine-tuning. However, this advantage is not reflected in BLEU scores, which often favor sentence-based translations. We propose using the LLM-as-a-judge paradigm for evaluation, where GPT-4 is used to assess document coherence, accuracy, and fluency in a more nuanced way than n-gram-based metrics. Overall, our work demonstrates that instruction-tuned LLMs can effectively leverage document context for translation. However, we caution against using BLEU scores for evaluating docMT, as they often provide misleading outcomes, failing to capture the quality of document-level translation.

Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback significantly enhances Natural Language Processing by aligning language models with human expectations. A critical factor in this alignment is the strength of reward models used during training. This study explores whether stronger reward models invariably lead to better language models. In this paper, through experiments on relevance, factuality, and completeness tasks using the QA-FEEDBACK dataset and reward models based on Longformer, we uncover a surprising paradox: language models trained with moderately accurate reward models outperform those guided by highly accurate ones. This challenges the widely held belief that stronger reward models always lead to better language models, and opens up new avenues for future research into the key factors driving model performance and how to choose the most suitable reward models.