Renfei Dang

Renfei Dang, Xinye Wang, Zhejian Lai et al.

Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) still struggle with fine-grained translation quality estimation (QE), even with long reasoning chains. We argue that LRMs already possess strong multilingual capabilities, while the core challenge stems from the intrinsic difficulty of learning the fine-grained QE task. In this paper, we propose RIEQE (Reasoning both Implicitly and Explicitly for QE), a simple two-stage training framework that enables the co-evolution of implicit (layer-wise) and explicit (token-wise) reasoning capabilities. To make implicit reasoning feasible, we first decompose the complex QE task into straightforward subtasks. Based on this, our two-stage approach applies: (1) NonThinking-SFT, Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT) without reasoning chains to directly boost the model's implicit reasoning tendency and capability; and (2) Thinking-RLVR, standard Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Reward (RLVR) to subsequently strengthen explicit reasoning. Results demonstrate that implicit and explicit reasoning synergistically co-evolve under our framework. On the WMT test sets, RIEQE based on Qwen3-4B-Thinking-2507 surpasses all baselines in explicit reasoning performance, while its implicit reasoning capability is also comparable to the best current encoder-based models. We further provide evidence for the synergistic collaboration between implicit and explicit reasoning, showing how they mutually benefit each other.

Renfei Dang, Peng Hu, Changjiang Gao et al.

Previous studies show that introducing new knowledge during large language models (LLMs) fine-tuning can lead to the generation of erroneous output when tested on known information, thereby triggering factual hallucinations. However, existing studies have not deeply investigated the specific manifestations and underlying mechanisms of these hallucinations. Our work addresses this gap by designing a controlled dataset Biography-Reasoning, and conducting a fine-grained analysis across multiple knowledge types and two task types, including knowledge question answering (QA) and knowledge reasoning tasks. We find that when fine-tuned on a dataset in which a specific knowledge type consists entirely of new knowledge, LLMs exhibit significantly increased hallucination tendencies. This suggests that the high unfamiliarity of a particular knowledge type, rather than the overall proportion of new knowledge, is a stronger driver of hallucinations, and these tendencies can even affect other knowledge types in QA tasks. To mitigate such factual hallucinations, we propose KnownPatch, which patches a small number of known knowledge samples in the later stages of training, effectively alleviating new-knowledge-induced hallucinations. Through attention analysis, we find that learning new knowledge reduces the model's attention to key entities in the question, thus causing excessive focus on the surrounding context, which may increase the risk of hallucination. Moreover, the attention pattern can propagate to similar contexts, facilitating the spread of hallucinations to textually similar questions. Our method effectively mitigates the disruption of new knowledge learning to the model's attention on key entities, accompanied by improved performance.

Renfei Dang, Zhening Li, Shujian Huang et al.

Reasoning models often exhibit overthinking, characterized by redundant reasoning steps. We identify \emph{internal bias} elicited by the input question as a key trigger of such behavior. Upon encountering a problem, the model immediately forms a preliminary guess about the answer, which we term an internal bias since it may not be explicitly generated, and it arises without systematic reasoning. When this guess conflicts with its subsequent reasoning, the model tends to engage in excessive reflection, resulting in wasted computation. We validate the association between internal bias and overthinking across multiple models and diverse reasoning tasks. To demonstrate the causal relationship more rigorously, we conduct two counterfactual interventions, showing that removing the input question after the model reduces the redundant reasoning across various complex reasoning tasks, and manually injecting bias affects overthinking accordingly. Further interpretability experiments suggest that excessive attention to the input question serves as a key mechanism through which internal bias influences subsequent reasoning trajectories. Finally, we evaluated several methods aimed at mitigating overthinking, yet the influence of internal bias persisted under all conditions.