Lucheng Fu

Jiaming Qu, Lucheng fu, Yibo Hu

Large language models are increasingly used in multi-agent systems, where they see and respond to other agents' answers. A key risk is conformity: a model may abandon its own answer simply because others agree on a different one. Prior studies show that LLMs often revise toward a majority answer, but it remains unclear whether these revisions help correct mistakes as often as they introduce new errors. In this paper, we conduct a controlled study in which an LLM first answers a question, then sees simulated peer responses before making a final decision. We manipulate two social cues: consensus structure and authority labels assigned to peers, and measure how they influence beneficial and harmful revisions. Across four open-weight LLMs and seven QA datasets, we find that peer agreement makes it much easier to mislead initially correct models than to correct initially wrong ones. Authority labels make models more likely to choose the endorsed answer, regardless of whether it is correct. More concerningly, generic reasoning interventions such as chain-of-thought and reflection do not reliably reduce harmful revision while preserving beneficial revision. These findings suggest that multi-agent LLM systems should verify peer answers rather than simply aggregate them.

Lucheng Fu, Ye Yu, Yiyang Wang et al.

Large language models (LLMs) are highly sensitive to the prompts used to specify task objectives and behavioral constraints. Many recent prompt optimization methods iteratively rewrite prompts using LLM-generated feedback, but the resulting prompts often become longer, accumulate narrow sample-specific rules, and generalize poorly beyond the training distribution. We study this failure mode as prompt distributional overfitting and argue that it reflects a lack of representation control in discrete text-space optimization. We formalize this view through representational inefficiency, a dual-factor measure that decomposes prompt inefficiency into capacity cost and scope narrowness, attributing distributional prompt overfitting to their coupled growth during optimization. We propose TextReg, a regularization framework that realizes a soft-penalty objective through regularized textual gradients, combining Dual-Evidence Gradient Purification, Semantic Edit Regularization, and Regularization-Guided Prompt Update. Across multiple reasoning benchmarks, TextReg substantially improves out-of-distribution (OOD) generalization, with accuracy gains of up to +11.8% over TextGrad and +16.5% over REVOLVE.

Yiqiao Jin, Yiyang Wang, Lucheng Fu et al.

Self-distillation (SD) offers a promising path for adapting large language models (LLMs) without relying on stronger external teachers. However, SD in autoregressive LLMs remains challenging because self-generated trajectories are free-form, correctness is task-dependent, and plausible rationales can still provide unstable or unreliable supervision. Existing methods mainly examine isolated design choices, leaving their effectiveness, roles, and interactions unclear. In this paper, we propose UniSD, a unified framework to systematically study self-distillation. UniSD integrates complementary mechanisms that address supervision reliability, representation alignment, and training stability, including multi-teacher agreement, EMA teacher stabilization, token-level contrastive learning, feature matching, and divergence clipping. Across six benchmarks and six models from three model families, UniSD reveals when self-distillation improves over static imitation, which components drive the gains, and how these components interact across tasks. Guided by these insights, we construct UniSDfull, an integrated pipeline that combines complementary components and achieves the strongest overall performance, improving over the base model by +5.4 points and the strongest baseline by +2.8 points. Extensive evaluation highlights self-distillation as a practical and steerable approach for efficient LLM adaptation without stronger external teachers.

Guancheng Wan, Lucheng Fu, Haoxin Liu et al.

The performance of Large Language Models (LLMs) hinges on carefully engineered prompts. However, prevailing prompt optimization methods, ranging from heuristic edits and reinforcement learning to evolutionary search, primarily target point-wise accuracy. They seldom enforce paraphrase invariance or searching stability, and therefore cannot remedy this brittleness in practice. Automated prompt search remains brittle: small, semantically preserving paraphrases often cause large performance swings. We identify this brittleness as the textual sharpness of the prompt landscape. In this work, we provide the first formal treatment of textual sharpness in the discrete, semantic space of prompts, together with an operational robustness criterion over a semantic neighborhood; the design is black-box or API-only, requiring no gradients to update the model's parameters. Then we introduce TARE (Textual Sharpness-Aware Evolving), a derivative-free framework that alternates between an inner, sampling-based adversarial search that stresses a prompt with hard paraphrases and an outer, robust selection that prefers candidates whose neighborhoods remain strong. We further propose ATARE, which learns anisotropic weights to shape the semantic neighborhood and adapts its radius over time to balance exploration and fidelity. Diverse tasks evaluate our methods, whose design for minimizing textual sharpness gap leads to prompts that preserve accuracy under paraphrasing, outperforming accuracy-only prompt search while remaining computationally practical.