Shu Yao

Qiran Zhang, Yuheng Wang, Runde Yang et al.

Programmatic video generation through code offers geometric precision and temporal coherence beyond pixel-level diffusion models, yet rigorously evaluating whether language models can produce spatially correct animated outputs remains an open problem. We introduce PRISM, a large-scale benchmark of 10,372 human-calibrated instruction-code pairs (20 times larger than prior programmatic video generation benchmarks), grounded in real-world knowledge visualization scenarios across English and Chinese and spanning 437 subject categories. We further propose a funnel-style evaluation framework with four complementary metrics: Code-Level Reliability for executability, Spatial Reasoning for layout correctness over full animation sequences, and Prompt-Aware Dynamic Visual Complexity (PADVC) and Temporal Density (TD) for diagnosing dynamic expression and temporal activity. Systematic evaluation of seven mainstream LLMs reveals a striking Execution-Spatial Gap: the average drop from execution success rate to spatial pass rate is approximately 41%, showing that runnable code does not necessarily yield spatially coherent visual output. These findings show that programmatic video generation evaluation should go beyond executability. PRISM provides a principled benchmark for advancing spatially coherent code generation.

Jingru Fan, Dewen Liu, Yufan Dang et al.

Recent advancements in Large Language Models (LLMs) have greatly extended the capabilities of Multi-Agent Systems (MAS), demonstrating significant effectiveness across a wide range of complex and open-ended domains. However, despite this rapid progress, the field still relies heavily on empirical trial-and-error. It lacks a unified and principled scientific framework necessary for systematic optimization and improvement. This bottleneck stems from the ambiguity of attribution: first, the absence of a structured taxonomy of factors leaves researchers restricted to unguided adjustments; second, the lack of a unified metric fails to distinguish genuine collaboration gain from mere resource accumulation. In this paper, we advocate for a transition to design science through an integrated framework. We advocate to establish the collaboration gain metric ($Γ$) as the scientific standard to isolate intrinsic gains from increased budgets. Leveraging $Γ$, we propose a factor attribution paradigm to systematically identify collaboration-driving factors. To support this, we construct a systematic MAS factor library, structuring the design space into control-level presets and information-level dynamics. Ultimately, this framework facilitates the transition from blind experimentation to rigorous science, paving the way towards a true science of Collective AI.

Tianyu Yu, Bo Ji, Shouli Wang et al. · tsinghua

Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) demonstrates promising potential in advancing the reasoning capabilities of LLMs. However, its success remains largely confined to mathematical and code domains. This primary limitation stems from the heavy reliance on domain-specific verifiers, which results in prohibitive complexity and limited scalability. To address the challenge, our key observation is that LLM's intrinsic probability of generating a correct free-form answer directly indicates its own evaluation of the reasoning reward (i.e., how well the reasoning process leads to the correct answer). Building on this insight, we propose RLPR, a simple verifier-free framework that extrapolates RLVR to broader general domains. RLPR uses the LLM's own token probability scores for reference answers as the reward signal and maximizes the expected reward during training. We find that addressing the high variance of this noisy probability reward is crucial to make it work, and propose prob-to-reward and stabilizing methods to ensure a precise and stable reward from LLM intrinsic probabilities. Comprehensive experiments in four general-domain benchmarks and three mathematical benchmarks show that RLPR consistently improves reasoning capabilities in both areas for Gemma, Llama, and Qwen based models. Notably, RLPR outperforms concurrent VeriFree by 7.6 points on TheoremQA and 7.5 points on Minerva, and even surpasses strong verifier-model-dependent approaches General-Reasoner by 1.6 average points across seven benchmarks.