Search and recommendation (S&R) are fundamental components of modern commercial platforms, enabling users to access and explore information efficiently. User behaviors in these scenarios reflect different aspects of user intent, providing an opportunity for joint modeling of S&R. However, effectively leveraging search logs to enhance recommendation remains a challenging task. Existing methods often encode S&R histories either jointly or separately; however, they tend to regard all search signals as equally informative, thereby neglecting that many search behaviors can be irrelevant or even detrimental to recommendation performance. In practice, however, search histories frequently contain noisy or outdated behaviors that may introduce spurious correlations and degrade recommendation performance. Motivated by the human decision-making process, where one first identifies recommendation intent and then selectively reasons about relevant search signals, we propose LCR-SER, a latent cross reasoning method for search-enhanced recommendation. LCR-SER first encodes the user's S&R history into a unified latent representation that captures users' global interests. It then performs iterative reasoning in the latent space to dynamically identify informative search signals that are most relevant to the recommendation. To further guide this reasoning process, we introduce contrastive learning to align the reasoning states with the target items. In addition, we employ reinforcement learning to directly optimize ranking-oriented metrics, enabling LCR-SER to refine its reasoning strategy toward improved recommendation performance. Experiments on public datasets demonstrate that LCR-SER consistently outperforms strong baselines, validating the effectiveness of latent reasoning in enhancing search-aware recommendation.

Deep search agents powered by large language models have demonstrated strong capabilities in multi-step retrieval, reasoning, and long-horizon task execution. However, their practical failures often stem from the lack of mechanisms to monitor and regulate reasoning and retrieval states as tasks evolve. Insights from cognitive neuroscience suggest that human metacognition is hierarchically organized, integrating fast anomaly detection with selectively triggered, experience-driven reflection. In this work, we propose Deep Search with Meta-Cognitive Monitoring (DS-MCM), a deep search framework augmented with an explicit hierarchical metacognitive monitoring mechanism. DS-MCM integrates a Fast Consistency Monitor, which performs lightweight checks on the alignment between external evidence and internal reasoning confidence, and a Slow Experience-Driven Monitor, which is selectively activated to guide corrective intervention based on experience memory from historical agent trajectories. By embedding monitoring directly into the reasoning–retrieval loop, DS-MCM determines both when intervention is warranted and how corrective actions should be informed by prior experience. Experiments across multiple deep search benchmarks and backbone models demonstrate that DS-MCM consistently improves performance and robustness.

Current benchmarks evaluate the performance of RAG methods from various perspectives, they share a common assumption that user queries used for retrieval are error-free. However, in real-world interactions between users and LLMs, query entry errors are frequent. The impact of these errors on current RAG methods against such errors remains largely unexplored. To bridge this gap, we propose QE-RAG, the first robust RAG benchmark designed specifically to evaluate performance against query entry errors. We analyze the impact of these errors on LLM outputs and find that corrupted queries degrade model performance, which can be mitigated through query correction and training a robust retriever for retrieving relevant documents. Based on these insights, we propose a contrastive learning-based robust retriever training method and a retrieval-augmented query correction method. Extensive experiments reveal that: (1) state-of-the-art RAG methods including sequential, branching, and iterative methods, exhibit poor robustness to query entry errors; (2) our method enhances the robustness of RAG when handling query entry errors and it's compatible with existing RAG methods, further improving their robustness.

In real-world streaming recommender systems, user preferences evolve dynamically over time. Existing bandit-based methods treat time merely as a timestamp, neglecting its explicit relationship with user preferences and leading to suboptimal performance. Moreover, the online learning methods often suffer from inefficient exploration–exploitation during the early online phase. To address these issues, we propose HyperBandit+, a novel contextual bandit policy which integrates a time-aware hypernetwork to adapt to time-varying user preferences and employs a large language model-assisted warm-start mechanism (LLM Start) to enhance exploration–exploitation efficiency at the early online phase. Specifically, HyperBandit+ leverages a neural network that takes time features as input and generates parameters for estimating time-varying rewards by capturing the correlation between time and user preferences. Additionally, the LLM Start mechanism employs multi-step data augmentation to simulate realistic interaction data for effective offline learning, providing warm-start parameters for the bandit policy at the early online phase. To meet real-time streaming recommendation demands, we adopt low-rank factorization to reduce hypernetwork training complexity. Theoretically, we rigorously establish a sublinear regret upper bound that accounts for both the hypernetwork and the LLM warm-start mechanism. Extensive experiments on real-world datasets demonstrate that HyperBandit+ consistently outperforms state-of-the-art baselines in terms of accumulated rewards.

In modern online platforms, search and recommendation (S&R) often coexist, offering opportunities for performance improvement through search-enhanced approaches. Existing studies show that incorporating search signals boosts recommendation performance. However, the effectiveness of these methods relies heavily on rich search interactions. They primarily benefit a small subset of users with abundant search behavior, while offering limited improvements for the majority of users who exhibit only sparse search activity. To address the problem of sparse search data in search-enhanced recommendation, we face two key challenges : (1) how to learn useful search features for users with sparse search interactions, and (2) how to design effective training objectives under sparse conditions. Our idea is to leverage the features of users with rich search interactions to enhance those of users with sparse search interactions. Based on this idea, we propose GSERec, a method that utilizes message passing on the User-Code Graphs to alleviate data sparsity in Search-Enhanced Recommendation. Specifically, we utilize Large Language Models (LLMs) with vector quantization to generate discrete codes, which connect similar users and thereby construct the graph. Through message passing on this graph, embeddings of users with rich search data are propagated to enhance the embeddings of users with sparse interactions. To further ensure that the message passing captures meaningful information from truly similar users, we introduce a contrastive loss to better model user similarities. The enhanced user representations are then integrated into downstream search-enhanced recommendation models. Experiments on three real-world datasets show that GSERec consistently outperforms baselines, especially for users with sparse search behaviors.

Syllogistic reasoning is a fundamental aspect of legal decision-making, enabling logical conclusions by connecting general legal principles with specific case facts. Although existing large language models (LLMs) can generate responses to legal questions, they fail to perform explicit syllogistic reasoning, often producing implicit and unstructured answers that lack explainability and trustworthiness. To address this limitation, we propose SyLeR, a novel framework that empowers LLMs to engage in explicit syllogistic legal reasoning. SyLeR integrates a tree-structured hierarchical retrieval mechanism to effectively combine relevant legal statutes and precedent cases, forming comprehensive major premises. This is followed by a two-stage fine-tuning process: supervised fine-tuning warm-up establishes a foundational understanding of syllogistic reasoning, while reinforcement learning with a structure-aware reward mechanism refines the model's ability to generate diverse logically sound and well-structured reasoning paths. We conducted extensive experiments across various dimensions, including in-domain and cross-domain user groups (legal laypersons and practitioners), multiple languages (Chinese and French), and different LLM backbones (legal-specific and open-domain LLMs). The results show that SyLeR significantly improves response accuracy and consistently delivers explicit, explainable, and trustworthy legal reasoning.

Personalized retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) aims to produce user-tailored responses by incorporating retrieved user profiles alongside the input query. Existing methods primarily focus on improving retrieval and rely on large language models (LLMs) to implicitly integrate the retrieved context with the query. However, such models are often sensitive to retrieval quality and may generate responses that are misaligned with user preferences. To address this limitation, we propose PrLM, a reinforcement learning framework that trains LLMs to explicitly reason over retrieved user profiles. Guided by a contrastively trained personalization reward model, PrLM effectively learns from user responses without requiring annotated reasoning paths. Experiments on three personalized text generation datasets show that PrLM outperforms existing methods and remains robust across varying numbers of retrieved profiles and different retrievers.

Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) systems for Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown promise in knowledge-intensive tasks, yet their reasoning capabilities, particularly for complex multi-step reasoning, remain limited. Although recent approaches have explored integrating RAG with chain-of-thought reasoning or incorporating test-time search with process reward model (PRM), these methods face several untrustworthy challenges, including lack of explanations, bias in PRM training data, early-step bias in PRM scores, and ignoring post-training that fails to fully optimize reasoning potential. To address these issues, we propose Retrieval-Augmented Reasoning through Trustworthy Process Rewarding (ReARTeR), a framework that enhances RAG systems' reasoning capabilities through both post-training and test-time scaling. At test time, ReARTeR introduces Trustworthy Process Rewarding via a Process Reward Model for accurate scalar scoring and a Process Explanation Model (PEM) for generating natural language explanations, enabling step refinement. During post-training, we leverage Monte Carlo Tree Search guided by Trustworthy Process Rewarding to collect high-quality step-level preference data, which is used to optimize the model through Iterative Preference Optimization. ReARTeR tackles three key challenges: (1) misalignment between PRM and PEM, addressed through off-policy preference learning; (2) bias in PRM training data, mitigated by a balanced annotation method and incorporating stronger annotations for difficult examples; and (3) early-step bias in PRM, resolved via a temporal-difference-based look-ahead search strategy. Experimental results on multi-step reasoning benchmarks demonstrate that ReARTeR significantly improves reasoning performance, highlighting its potential to advance the reasoning capability of RAG systems.

Legal document retrieval and judgment prediction are crucial tasks in intelligent legal systems. In practice, determining whether two documents share the same judgments is essential for establishing their relevance in legal retrieval. However, existing legal retrieval studies either ignore the vital role of judgment prediction or rely on implicit training objectives, expecting a proper alignment of legal documents in vector space based on their judgments. Neither approach provides explicit evidence of judgment consistency for relevance modeling, leading to inaccuracies and a lack of transparency in retrieval. To address this issue, we propose a law-guided method, namely GEAR, within the generative retrieval framework. GEAR explicitly integrates judgment prediction with legal document retrieval in a sequence-to-sequence manner. Specifically, given the intricate nature of legal documents, we first extract rationales from documents based on the definition of charges in law. We then employ these rationales as queries, ensuring efficiency and producing a shared, informative document representation for both tasks. Second, in accordance with the inherent hierarchy of law, we construct a law structure constraint tree and represent each candidate document as a hierarchical semantic ID based on this tree. This empowers GEAR to perform dual predictions for judgment and relevant documents in a single inference, i.e., traversing the tree from the root through intermediate judgment nodes, to document-specific leaf nodes. Third, we devise the revision loss that jointly minimizes the discrepancy between the IDs of predicted and labeled judgments, as well as retrieved documents, thus improving accuracy and consistency for both tasks. Extensive experiments on two Chinese legal case retrieval datasets show the superiority of GEAR over state-of-the-art methods while maintaining competitive judgment prediction performance. Moreover, we validate the effectiveness of GEAR on a French statutory article retrieval dataset, reaffirming its robustness across languages and domains.

Reinforcement learning (RL) has gained popularity in recommender systems for improving long-term performance by effectively exploring users' interests. However, modern recommender systems face the challenge of different user behavioral patterns among millions of items, making exploration more difficult. For example, users with varying activity levels require different exploration intensities. Unfortunately, previous studies often overlook this aspect and apply a uniform exploration strategy to all users, which ultimately hampers long-term user experiences. To tackle these challenges, we propose User-Oriented Exploration Policy (UOEP), a novel approach that enables fine-grained exploration among user groups. We first construct a distributional critic that allows policy optimization based on varying quantile levels of cumulative reward feedback from users, representing user groups with different activity levels. Using this critic as a guide, we design a population of distinct actors dedicated to effective and fine-grained exploration within their respective user groups. To simultaneously enhance diversity and stability during the exploration process, we also introduce a population-level diversity regularization term and a supervision module. Experimental results on public recommendation datasets validate the effectiveness of our approach, as it outperforms all other baselines in terms of long-term performance. Moreover, further analyses reveal the benefits of our approach, including improved performance for low-activity users and increased fairness among users.

Providing human-understandable explanations for the matching predictions is still challenging for current legal case matching methods. One difficulty is that legal cases are semi-structured text documents with complicated case-case and case-law article correlations. To tackle the issue, we propose a novel graph optimal transport (GOT)-based legal case matching model that is able to provide not only the matching predictions but also plausible and faithful explanations for the prediction. The model, called GEIOT-Match, first constructs a heterogeneous graph to explicitly represent the semi-structured nature of legal cases and their associations with the law articles. Therefore, matching two legal cases amounts to identifying the rationales from the paired legal case sub-graphs in the heterogeneous graph and then aligning between them. An inverse optimal transport (IOT) model on graphs is learned to extract rationales from paired legal cases. The extracted rationales and the heterogeneous graph demonstrate the key legal characteristics of legal cases, which can be further used to conduct matching and generate explanations for the matching. Experimental results showed that GEIOT-Match outperformed state-of-the-art baselines in terms of matching prediction, rationale extraction, and natural language explanation generation.

The debut of ChatGPT has recently attracted significant attention from the natural language processing (NLP) community and beyond. Existing studies have demonstrated that ChatGPT shows significant improvement in a range of downstream NLP tasks, but the capabilities and limitations of ChatGPT in terms of recommendations remain unclear. In this study, we aim to enhance ChatGPT’s recommendation capabilities by aligning it with traditional information retrieval (IR) ranking capabilities, including point-wise, pair-wise, and list-wise ranking. To achieve this goal, we re-formulate the aforementioned three recommendation policies into prompt formats tailored specifically to the domain at hand. Through extensive experiments on four datasets from different domains, we analyze the distinctions among the three recommendation policies. Our findings indicate that ChatGPT achieves an optimal balance between cost and performance when equipped with list-wise ranking. This research sheds light on a promising direction for aligning ChatGPT with recommendation tasks. To facilitate further explorations in this area, the full code and detailed original results are open-sourced at https://github.com/rainym00d/LLM4RS.

As an essential operation of legal retrieval, legal case matching plays a central role in intelligent legal systems. This task has a high demand on the explainability of matching results because of its critical impacts on downstream applications --- the matched legal cases may provide supportive evidence for the judgments of target cases and thus influence the fairness and justice of legal decisions. Focusing on this challenging task, we propose a novel and explainable method, namely IOT-Match, with the help of computational optimal transport, which formulates the legal case matching problem as an inverse optimal transport (IOT) problem. Different from most existing methods, which merely focus on the sentence-level semantic similarity between legal cases, our IOT-Match learns to extract rationales from paired legal cases based on both semantics and legal characteristics of their sentences. The extracted rationales are further applied to generate faithful explanations and conduct matching. Moreover, the proposed IOT-Match is robust to the alignment label insufficiency issue commonly in practical legal case matching tasks, which is suitable for both supervised and semi-supervised learning paradigms. To demonstrate the superiority of our IOT-Match method and construct a benchmark of explainable legal case matching task, we not only extend the well-known Challenge of AI in Law (CAIL) dataset but also build a new Explainable Legal cAse Matching (ELAM) dataset, which contains lots of legal cases with detailed and explainable annotations. Experiments on these two datasets show that our IOT-Match outperforms state-of-the-art methods consistently on matching prediction, rationale extraction, and explanation generation.