Matched via arXiv identifier search · Strong overlap with paper title keywords
- Stars
- 46
- Last push
- Jun 12, 2026 (6d ago)
Risk flags
- No CI pipeline detected
- No tagged releases
- No Docker setup
Deyu Zou, Yongqiang Chen, Fan Feng, Mufei Li, Pan Li, Yu Gong, James Cheng
Core AI workload signals detected from paper context and implementation/artifact evidence.
Reinforcement learning (RL) with outcome-based rewards has achieved significant success in training large language model (LLM) agents for complex reasoning tasks. However, in active reasoning where agents need to strategically ask questions to acquire task-relevant information, we find that LLM agents trained with RL often suffer from information self-locking: the agent ceases to ask informative questions and struggl ...
es to internalize already-obtained information. To understand the phenomenon, we decompose active reasoning into two core capabilities: Action Selection (AS), which determines the observation stream through queries, and Belief Tracking (BT), which updates the agent's belief based on collected evidence. We show that deficient AS and BT capabilities will limit the information exploration during RL training. Furthermore, insufficient exploration in turn hinders the improvement of AS and BT, creating a feedback loop that locks the agent in a low-information regime. To resolve the issue, we propose a simple yet effective approach that reallocates the learning signal by injecting easy- to-obtain directional critiques to help the agent escape self-locking. Extensive experiments with 7 datasets show that our approach significantly mitigates the information self-locking, bringing up to 60% improvements.
No concrete benchmark grounding is available yet. Treat the page as context or an implementation starting point only.
Reinforcement learning (RL) with outcome-based rewards has achieved significant success in training large language model (LLM) agents for complex reasoning tasks.
Recommendation evidence is currently too limited for a maintained-repo choice. Use Implementation Status and Reproduction Path for a practical baseline plan.
Hardware Notes
Expect multi-day setup/compute for meaningful reproduction based on current guidance.
Evidence graph: 3 refs, 2 links.
Utility signals: depth 60/100, grounding 68/100, status medium.
Compare maintenance quality, reproducibility coverage, and evidence confidence before choosing a reproduction baseline.
Matched via arXiv identifier search · Strong overlap with paper title keywords
Risk flags
Matched via arXiv identifier search
Risk flags
There is no verified maintained implementation yet. Use this baseline plan to decide whether to prototype now or defer.
Hardware requirements
No verified implementation available
No benchmark numbers could be verified. You will not be able to validate reproduction correctness against published numbers.
No additional official repositories detected.
(ICLR'26 Oral + ICML'26) Learning to Seek and Use Information: Agentic Active Reasoning under Partial Observability
These repositories had low-confidence matching signals and are hidden by default.
No direct paper-linked artifacts were found. Showing strongest curated related artifacts for faster exploration.
Broaden model search
No trustworthy dataset matches right now.
Search datasets on Hugging FaceNo trustworthy demo spaces right now.
Search spaces on Hugging FaceTasks
Agentic tool use
Methods
Reinforcement learning
Domains
Natural Language Processing, Large Language Models, AI Agents
Evaluation & Human Feedback Data
Open this paper in HFEPX to review benchmark signals, evaluation modes, and human-feedback protocol context.
Open in HFEPXExplore Similar Papers
Jump to Paper2Code search queries derived from this paper's research context.
Need human evaluators for your AI research? Scale annotation with expert AI Trainers.