论文库

We introduce GeoWorld, a controllable and continuously evolving geographic environment platform for LLM agents, and LiveGeo, a benchmark for evaluating reliable decision-making in real-world geographic environments using GeoWorld. Unlike existing evaluations that largely reason and plan over fixed geographic states, GeoWorld is grounded in real-world geographic structure and allows external world states to evolve along their own temporal processes while preserving verifiable state histories. LiveGeo places geographic tasks within this evolving environment, requiring agents to actively acquire task-relevant information, verify whether the evidence supporting prior decisions remains valid, and revise their plans when necessary. Our results reveal that even frontier LLMs struggle with static tasks, with no model consistently excelling across tasks, while strong static performance does not ensure dynamic reliability. Further analysis identifies a key bottleneck: agents struggle to acquire and translate relevant evidence into valid decisions and maintain their correctness as the world evolves. By releasing LiveGeo together with its GeoWorld platform, we aim to provide the community with a flexible and extensible infrastructure for studying the next generation of agents capable of reliable action in evolving geographic worlds.

Large reasoning models (LRMs) improve task performance by generating longer intermediate reasoning traces, but this substantially increases inference costs and makes low-precision quantization increasingly important. However, aggressively quantized models often perform poorly on reasoning tasks. We observe larger activation fluctuations during the first decoding steps of reasoning. Calibration that omits these early states may miss their activation fluctuations. To address these reasoning-specific quantization challenges, we propose \textbf{CodeQuant2}, a clustering-based LUT quantization framework for low-precision large reasoning models. CodeQuant2 mitigates activation outliers with rotation and scaling, uses clustering to represent non-uniform weight distributions, and adapts codebook sizes to the quantization difficulty of each layer. Guided by our observation of reasoning-time activation behavior, CodeQuant2 further improves calibration sample selection to better match actual decoding statistics. Combined with our customized LUT CUDA kernel, CodeQuant2 delivers substantial accuracy improvements on reasoning benchmarks while achieving up to $2.85\times$ speedup over BF16.

Current medical benchmarks typically break down clinical competence into isolated factual questions, single-image tasks, or static case vignettes. These tests score individual answers, but reveal less about whether a model can integrate subspecialty knowledge with multimodal evidence and track a patient's condition throughout a course of care. To close this gap, we introduce NPCBench, a clinical apprenticeship benchmark for nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). NPCBench mirrors specialist training, from guideline and foundational knowledge to case planning, longitudinal review, CarePath integration, and open-ended consultation. It contains 4,777 component and consultation items and a 100-patient CarePath cohort with 417 scored diagnostic and care tasks. The episode-level evaluation tests whether diagnostic and care answers are jointly correct within a care pathway. By linking stepwise tasks to patient-level care trajectories, NPCBench evaluates whether models ground decisions in visual evidence, interpret changes in patient state, and meet clinical requirements in consultation. Across 30 evaluated models, we observe a composition gap: strong performance on individual tasks does not ensure jointly correct diagnostic and care answers for the same patient. Among 21 multimodal models, strict CarePath success reaches at most 23%. Paired controls and physician calibration further examine evidence grounding, longitudinal revision, and consultation judging. Overall, NPCBench broadens the evaluation of medical artificial intelligence beyond static question-answering paradigms to an apprenticeship-oriented assessment of clinical workflows, thereby offering a testbed for evidence-based and temporally coherent reasoning in oncology care.