Skip to content

Author

Dayiheng Liu

We have 5 of 109 papers

We haven’t gathered this author’s papers yet. Follow them and we’ll fetch their work.

Not the right person? Other researchers publish under this name.

Preprint Jul 2026

Contrastive On-Policy Distillation

On-policy Distillation (OPD) supervises a student model on trajectories sampled from its own policy by minimizing the divergence between the output distributions of the teacher and student at each token position, thereby providing dense token-level supervision. Although existing OPD methods have demonstrated strong performance in improving the reasoning ability of student models, their objectives fundamentally rely on token-level distribution matching. Consequently, they lack an explicit signal for comparing a token's relative compatibility across reasoning modes and thus do not directly model preferences between these modes. To address this limitation, we propose COPD, a contrastive OPD framework. Specifically, for each token generated by the student model, a frozen teacher model scores the same student state under two contrasting instructions that elicit light and heavy reasoning. The difference between the resulting log probabilities serves as a token-level advantage signal to guide the OPD update. Rather than merely imitating a single teacher distribution, COPD directly encourages the student model to learn more concise and efficient reasoning strategies. We conduct experiments on nine multimodal benchmarks covering both reasoning and understanding tasks. The results show that COPD substantially reduces reasoning length without compromising model performance and consistently improves efficiency across different tasks and model scales. Furthermore, the contrastive formulation can be seamlessly integrated into the On-policy Self-distillation (OPSD) framework, where self-contrastive supervision is constructed without an additional teacher model, thereby enabling the model to distill itself toward lightweight reasoning.

Jiacheng Ruan, Jun Tang, Wenzhen Yuan et al. · 1 citation
Preprint Jul 2026

Are the Financial Reasoning from LLMs Credible? A Real World Test over Long-Horizon Statements

Do Large Language Models (LLMs) possess genuine structural reasoning, or merely rely on surface-level pattern matching? The financial domain, demanding numerical precision and multi-step logic over long contexts, is an ideal testbed. Existing benchmarks fail to capture real-world industrial complexity, predominantly relying on multiple-choice questions or single-hop QA over cropped tables while ignoring intricate cross-statement dynamics and temporal de-cumulation. To bridge this gap, we introduce FinIndices, a large-scale benchmark evaluating data-processing fidelity over uncropped financial statements (up to 32K tokens). Utilizing an automated synthesis pipeline with adversarial traps, FinIndices encompasses Single-Index computation and Table-Index tabulation to test complex domain, temporal, and caliber reasoning. Our evaluation reveals two severe LLM vulnerabilities. First, a"Knowledge Bottleneck": despite memorizing formulas during pre-training, models demonstrate fragile pattern matching. Removing explicit formula hints causes performance to collapse (e.g., Gemini-3.1-Pro drops from 70.70% to 38.22% on table tasks), exposing fatal flaws in temporal de-cumulation and stock-flow caliber mismatch. Second, a"Structural Bottleneck": the intense cognitive load of generating multi-metric, multi-period tables actively drains reasoning capacity. Under structural pressure, LLMs that flawlessly execute isolated derivations regress to shallow heuristics, such as fetching incorrect adjacent columns or substituting deep accounting adjustments with lazy literal arithmetic. Finally, Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT) yields substantial zero-hint gains (+8.54% Single, +3.82% Table), validating that structured logic can be partially restored via data-centric alignment.

Xin Tong, Xuanming Zhang, Tianyi Tang et al. · 0 citations
Preprint Jul 2026

WildTrace: Benchmarking Natural Evidence Trails in Long-Context Reasoning

WILDTRACE is introduced, a benchmark of 481 tasks over 214 naturally occurring long-form sources such as technical incident reports and lesser-known literary narratives, where all evidence trails arise from the document's own causal, temporal, and narrative logic.

Zixin Chen, Peng Liu, Haobo Li et al. · 0 citations
Preprint Aug 2026

Qwen-CUA: Native Computer Use for (almost) Everything

Qwen-CUA is introduced, a native computer-use agent with a 397B-A17B Qwen mixture-of-experts backbone that outperforms Qwen3.7 and remains competitive with leading proprietary systems, and scalable verifiable interaction and hybrid tool use as key directions.

Dunjie Lu, Shuai Bai, Tianyi Bai et al. · 0 citations
Jun 2026

OSWorld2.0: Benchmarking Computer Use Agents on Long-Horizon Real-World Tasks

These results show that current agents are still far from professional-level computer use: rather than stumbling on basic GUI control or coding, they lose track of constraints, miss information that arrives mid-task, guess rather than ask the user, and skip verification, struggling most when a task hinges on hidden state they must recover.

Mengqi Yuan, Zilong Zhou, Xinzhuang Xiong et al. · 11 citations · ⚡5