Ao Yu

Jun Xu, Xinkai Du, Yu Ao et al.

Efficient retrieval of external knowledge bases and web pages is crucial for enhancing the reasoning abilities of LLMs. Previous works on training LLMs to leverage external retrievers for solving complex problems have predominantly employed end-to-end reinforcement learning. However, these approaches neglect supervision over the reasoning process, making it difficult to guarantee logical coherence and rigor. To address these limitations, we propose Thinker, a hierarchical thinking model for deep search through multi-turn interaction, making the reasoning process supervisable and verifiable. It decomposes complex problems into independently solvable sub-problems, each dually represented in both natural language and an equivalent logical function to support knowledge base and web searches. Concurrently, dependencies between sub-problems are passed as parameters via these logical functions, enhancing the logical coherence of the problem-solving process. To avoid unnecessary external searches, we perform knowledge boundary determination to check if a sub-problem is within the LLM's intrinsic knowledge, allowing it to answer directly. Experimental results indicate that with as few as several hundred training samples, the performance of Thinker is competitive with established baselines. Furthermore, when scaled to the full training set, Thinker significantly outperforms these methods across various datasets and model sizes. The source code is available at https://github.com/OpenSPG/KAG-Thinker.

Heng Zhou, Zelin Tan, Zhemeng Zhang et al.

When an LLM-based agent improves on a task, is the gain from the model itself or from the reasoning paradigm wrapped around it? We study this question by comparing six inference-time paradigms, namely Direct, CoT, ReAct, Plan-Execute, Reflection, and ReCode, across four frontier LLMs and ten benchmarks, yielding roughly 18,000 runs. We find that reasoning structure helps dramatically on some tasks but hurts on others: ReAct improves over Direct by 44pp on GAIA, while CoT degrades performance by 15pp on HumanEval. No single paradigm dominates, and oracle per-task selection beats the best fixed paradigm by 17.1pp on average. Motivated by this complementarity, we propose a select-then-solve approach: before answering each task, a lightweight embedding-based router selects the most suitable paradigm. Across four models, the router improves average accuracy from 47.6% to 53.1%, outperforming the best fixed paradigm at 50.3% by 2.8pp and recovering up to 37% of the oracle gap. In contrast, zero-shot self-routing only works for GPT-5 at 67.1% and fails for weaker models, all trailing the learned router. Our results argue that reasoning paradigm selection should be a per-task decision made by a learned router, not a fixed architectural choice.

Heng Zhou, Ao Yu, Yuchen Fan et al.

Evaluating large language models (LLMs) on question answering often relies on static benchmarks that reward memorization and understate the role of retrieval, failing to capture the dynamic nature of world knowledge. We present LiveSearchBench, an automated pipeline for constructing retrieval-dependent benchmarks from recent knowledge updates. Our method computes deltas between successive Wikidata snapshots, filters candidate triples for quality, and synthesizes natural-language questions at three levels of reasoning difficulty, each guaranteed to admit a unique, verifiable answer through SPARQL validation. The pipeline is fully automated, scalable across time, and minimizes human intervention, enabling continual regeneration of temporally grounded benchmarks. Experiments show a pronounced performance drop when models confront facts that post-date pretraining, with the gap most salient on multi-hop queries. Retrieval augmented methods and larger, instruction-tuned models provide partial gains but fail to close this recency gap. By design, LiveSearchBench shifts evaluation from static memorization toward tasks that require up-to-date retrieval and reasoning, offering a foundation for systematic, long-term assessment of LLMs under evolving knowledge.

Dalong Zhang, Jun Xu, Jun Zhou et al.

In this paper, we introduce KAG-Thinker, which upgrade KAG to a multi-turn interactive thinking and deep reasoning framework powered by a dedicated parameter-light large language model (LLM). Our approach constructs a structured thinking process for solving complex problems, enhancing the the logical coherence and contextual consistency of the reasoning process in question-answering (Q&A) tasks on domain-specific knowledge bases (KBs) within LLMs. Following the \textbf{Logical Form} guided retrieval and reasoning technology route of KAG, this framework first decomposes complex questions into independently solvable sub-problems (which are also referred to as logical forms) through \textbf{breadth decomposition}. Each such logical form is represented in two equivalent forms-natural language and logical function-and subsequently classified as either a Knowledge Retrieval or Reasoning Analysis task. Dependencies and parameter passing between these tasks are explicitly modeled via logical function interfaces. In the solving process, the Retrieval function performs retrieval tasks. It retrieves one-hop structured and unstructured information of specified knowledge unit. While the Math and Deduce functions are used to perform reasoning analysis tasks. Secondly, it is worth noting that, in the Knowledge Retrieval sub-problem tasks, LLMs and external knowledge sources are regarded as equivalent KBs. We use the \textbf{knowledge boundary} module to determine the optimal source using self-regulatory mechanisms such as confidence calibration and reflective reasoning, and use the \textbf{depth solving} module to enhance the comprehensiveness of knowledge acquisition...