Jing Ye
Publications
HRBench: Benchmarking and Understanding Thinking-Mode Switch Strategies in Hybrid-Reasoning LLMs
Hybrid-reasoning large language models (LLMs) expose explicit controls over reasoning effort, allowing users or systems to trade off answer quality against inference cost. However, existing methods for adaptive thinking-mode selection are typically evaluated under different models, datasets, and implementation assumptions, making it difficult to compare their practical behavior. We introduce HRBench, a unified evaluation framework for studying thinking-mode switching in hybrid-reasoning LLMs. HRBench organizes the design space along two axes: three switching strategy families, prompt-based selection, external routing, and speculative execution, and four training regimes, training-free, SFT, offline and online RL, yielding 12 controlled evaluation settings. We evaluate these settings across 6 LLMs, from Qwen3.5-2B to Kimi-K2.5-1.1T, and 5 reasoning benchmarks covering mathematics, science, and code, while reimplementing 12+ representative prior methods within the same pipeline. Our analysis characterizes how different switching strategies occupy distinct effectiveness-efficiency trade-off regions: prompt-based methods often provide favorable token-accuracy trade-offs, routing methods offer more stable cost reduction, and speculative methods tend to improve accuracy at higher token cost. We further find that training affects strategies differently, and that the preferred strategy varies with model scale and task domain. HRBench provides reference implementations and a unified evaluation platform to support more controlled research on efficient reasoning in hybrid-reasoning LLMs. Our data, code and repository are available at https://github.com/usail-hkust/HRBench.
ALIVE: Awakening LLM Reasoning via Adversarial Learning and Instructive Verbal Evaluation
The quest for expert-level reasoning in Large Language Models (LLMs) has been hampered by a persistent \textit{reward bottleneck}: traditional reinforcement learning (RL) relies on scalar rewards that are \textbf{costly} to scale, \textbf{brittle} across domains, and \textbf{blind} to the underlying logic of a solution. This reliance on external, impoverished signals prevents models from developing a deep, self-contained understanding of reasoning principles. We introduce \textbf{ALIVE} (\emph{Adversarial Learning with Instructive Verbal Evaluation}), a hands-free alignment framework that moves beyond scalar reward optimization toward intrinsic reasoning acquisition. Grounded in the principle of \emph{Cognitive Synergy}, ALIVE unifies problem posing, solving, and judging within a single policy model to internalize the logic of correctness. By coupling adversarial learning with instructive verbal feedback, ALIVE enables models to internalize evaluative criteria directly from raw corpora, effectively transforming external critiques into an endogenous reasoning faculty. Empirical evaluations across mathematical reasoning, code generation, and general logical inference benchmarks demonstrate that ALIVE consistently mitigates reward signal limitations. With identical data and compute, it achieves accuracy gains, markedly improved cross-domain generalization, and higher self-correction rates. These results indicate that the reasoning trinity fosters a self-sustaining trajectory of capability growth, positioning ALIVE as a scalable foundation for general-purpose reasoning alignment without human-in-the-loop supervision.
Beyond Text-to-SQL: Can LLMs Really Debug Enterprise ETL SQL?
SQL is central to enterprise data engineering, yet generating fully correct SQL code in a single attempt remains difficult, even for experienced developers and advanced text-to-SQL LLMs, often requiring multiple debugging iterations. We introduce OurBench, the first benchmark for enterprise-level SQL reasoning and debugging. Our benchmark is built on two key innovations: (1) an automated construction workflow that uses reverse engineering to systematically inject realistic bugs into large-scale SQL code, enabling scalable and diverse benchmark generation; and (2) an execution-free evaluation framework tailored to enterprise settings, providing fast, accurate, and resource-efficient assessment. OurBench comprises 469 OurBenchSyn queries featuring syntax errors with explicit error messages, and 516 OurBenchSem queries targeting semantic errors in which the code fails to meet user intent. The queries are highly complex, averaging over 140 lines and featuring deep and wide abstract syntax trees. Evaluation of nearly 30 LLMs reveals a substantial performance gap: the best-performing model, Claude-4-Sonnet, achieves only 36.46 percent accuracy on OurBenchSyn and 32.17 percent on OurBenchSem, while most models score below 20 percent. We further explore four solution strategies, identify key challenges, and outline promising directions for enterprise SQL debugging with LLMs.