Ben He

Ruiyang Xu, Jialun Cao, Yaojie Lu et al.

Code benchmarks such as HumanEval are widely adopted to evaluate Large Language Models' (LLMs) coding capabilities. However, there is an unignorable programming language bias in existing code benchmarks -- over 95% code generation benchmarks are dominated by Python, leaving the LLMs' capabilities in other programming languages such as Java and C/C++ unknown. Moreover, coding task bias is also crucial. Most benchmarks focus on code generation capability, while benchmarks for code reasoning (given input, reasoning output; and given output, reasoning input), an essential coding capability, are insufficient. Yet, constructing multi-lingual benchmarks can be expensive and labor-intensive, and codes in contest websites such as Leetcode suffer from data contamination during training. To fill this gap, we propose CRUXEVAL-X, a multi-lingual code reasoning benchmark that contains 19 programming languages. It comprises at least 600 subjects for each language, along with 19K content-consistent tests in total. In particular, the construction pipeline of CRUXEVAL-X works in a fully automated and test-guided manner, which iteratively generates and repairs based on execution feedback. Also, to cross language barriers (e.g., dynamic/static type systems in Python/C++), we formulated various transition rules between language pairs to facilitate translation. Our intensive evaluation of 24 representative LLMs reveals the correlation between language pairs. For example, TypeScript and JavaScript show a significant positive correlation, while Racket has less correlation with other languages. More interestingly, even a model trained solely on Python can achieve at most 34.4% Pass@1 in other languages, revealing the cross-language generalization of LLMs.

Yihan Chen, Jiawei Chen, Guozhao Mo et al.

The growing integration of large language models (LLMs) into the peer review process presents potential risks to the fairness and reliability of scholarly evaluation. While LLMs offer valuable assistance for reviewers with language refinement, there is growing concern over their use to generate substantive review content. Existing general AI-generated text detectors are vulnerable to paraphrasing attacks and struggle to distinguish between surface language refinement and substantial content generation, suggesting that they primarily rely on stylistic cues. When applied to peer review, this limitation can result in unfairly suspecting reviews with permissible AI-assisted language enhancement, while failing to catch deceptively humanized AI-generated reviews. To address this, we propose a paradigm shift from style-based to content-based detection. Specifically, we introduce CoCoNUTS, a content-oriented benchmark built upon a fine-grained dataset of AI-generated peer reviews, covering six distinct modes of human-AI collaboration. Furthermore, we develop CoCoDet, an AI review detector via a multi-task learning framework, designed to achieve more accurate and robust detection of AI involvement in review content. Our work offers a practical foundation for evaluating the use of LLMs in peer review, and contributes to the development of more precise, equitable, and reliable detection methods for real-world scholarly applications. Our code and data will be publicly available at https://github.com/Y1hanChen/COCONUTS.

Ying Zhou, Ben He, Le Sun

With the launch of ChatGPT, large language models (LLMs) have attracted global attention. In the realm of article writing, LLMs have witnessed extensive utilization, giving rise to concerns related to intellectual property protection, personal privacy, and academic integrity. In response, AI-text detection has emerged to distinguish between human and machine-generated content. However, recent research indicates that these detection systems often lack robustness and struggle to effectively differentiate perturbed texts. Currently, there is a lack of systematic evaluations regarding detection performance in real-world applications, and a comprehensive examination of perturbation techniques and detector robustness is also absent. To bridge this gap, our work simulates real-world scenarios in both informal and professional writing, exploring the out-of-the-box performance of current detectors. Additionally, we have constructed 12 black-box text perturbation methods to assess the robustness of current detection models across various perturbation granularities. Furthermore, through adversarial learning experiments, we investigate the impact of perturbation data augmentation on the robustness of AI-text detectors. We have released our code and data at https://github.com/zhouying20/ai-text-detector-evaluation.

Xueru Wen, Jie Lou, Yanjiang Liu et al.

While reinforcement learning has achieved impressive progress in language model reasoning, it is constrained by the requirement for verifiable rewards. Recent verifier-free RL methods address this limitation by utilizing the probabilities that LLMs generate reference answers as reward signals. However, these approaches typically sample reasoning traces conditioned only on the question. This design decouples reasoning-trace sampling from answer information, leading to inefficient exploration and incoherence between traces and final answers. In this paper, we propose \textit{\b{Co}upled \b{V}ariational \b{R}einforcement \b{L}earning} (CoVRL), which bridges variational inference and reinforcement learning by coupling prior and posterior distributions through a hybrid sampling strategy. By constructing and optimizing a composite distribution that integrates these two distributions, CoVRL enables efficient exploration while preserving strong thought-answer coherence. Extensive experiments on mathematical and general reasoning benchmarks show that CoVRL improves performance by 12.4\% over the base model and achieves an additional 2.3\% improvement over state-of-the-art verifier-free RL baselines, providing a principled framework for enhancing the general reasoning capabilities of language models.