Xiaolong Jin

Weicheng Ren, Zixuan Li, Long Bai et al.

Event ontology expansion aims to discover emerging event types from data and extend them to appropriate positions in the existing event ontology.. Existing methods typically cluster contextualized trigger representations and attach induced clusters to the ontology based on instance-level similarity. However, ontology expansion requires concept-level semantics that characterize event types, whereas contextualized trigger representations often conflate these semantics with surface contextual variation, leading to unstable clustering and unreliable hierarchy expansion. To address this issue, we propose ConceptE, a conceptualization-enhanced framework for event ontology expansion. ConceptE first derives concept-level semantics by prompting an LLM with the sentence and event trigger, producing a concise concept name and a natural-language description. It then jointly encodes these semantics with trigger information to build concept-enhanced representations aligned with ontology-level reasoning. This representation design supports more coherent event clustering, more reliable hierarchy expansion, and ontology-consistent type naming. Experiments on ACE, ERE, and MAVEN demonstrate that ConceptE consistently outperforms state-of-the-art approaches across all subtasks of event ontology expansion. In particular, it achieves improvements of up to 12.37\% in BCubed-F1 for event clustering and 6.48\% in Taxo\_F1 for hierarchy expansion, demonstrating the effectiveness of the proposed ConceptE method.

Xiaolong Jin, Xuandong Zhao, Wenbo Guo et al.

Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) has driven substantial progress in large language model reasoning, but relies on ground-truth supervision that is costly or infeasible, especially in coding tasks. Recent work addresses this by deriving rewards from a model's own signals, such as majority voting or confidence-based scores, achieving notable success on mathematical reasoning benchmarks. However, code generation poses distinct challenges: programs are structurally complex, semantically equivalent solutions may differ syntactically, and verification typically requires execution. Whether these intrinsic reward methods transfer effectively to code remains unexplored. In this work, we present a systematic empirical study of intrinsic reward methods for code generation. We conduct extensive experiments on LiveCodeBench, systematically evaluating representative certainty-based Reinforcement Learning from Internal Feedback (RLIF) approaches under different training scenarios and hyperparameter settings. Our experiments reveal that certainty-based methods yield early gains but inevitably collapse: models progressively shorten outputs and lose reasoning capability, with collapse speed sensitive to sample size and temperature. When used to initialize RLVR training, RLIF pre-training offers no significant improvement over training from scratch. We also provide actionable recommendations for using intrinsic rewards for training code reasoning models. Our study shows both the promise and limitations of intrinsic reward methods for code, informing future work on code models and agents.