Large Language Models (LLMs) often suffer from hallucination and struggle with complex reasoning tasks requiring multi-hop domain knowledge. While integrating Knowledge Graphs (KGs) provides a structured and verifiable information source, current KG-enhanced LLM paradigms usually rely on single-agent path extraction and fixed prompting, lacking adaptability and facing huge search spaces. To address these challenges, we propose RACER, a Reinforced Agent Collaboration framework for Explainable Reasoning on knowledge graphs. RACER employs a semantic-aware action pruning and teacher-guided reinforcement learning mechanism to efficiently extract high-quality reasoning pathways from large-scale KGs. Furthermore, to mitigate single-path generation pitfalls, we introduce a cross-task accumulated shared memory graph paired with an attention-driven multi-path knowledge refinement module. Finally, RACER orchestrates these components through a four-role multi-agent collaboration system (GraphAgent, TemplateAgent, AnswerAgent, and CriticAgent) to dynamically refine prompts and evaluate answers. Extensive experiments on CommonsenseQA and OpenBookQA datasets demonstrate that RACER significantly outperforms state-of-the-art KG-enhanced LLM baselines with an average improvement of 5\%, offering robust and highly interpretable reasoning capabilities.
Facial biometric recognition systems currently face compound threats intertwining generative AI and high-fidelity physical spoofing. Existing defenses suffer from systemic bottlenecks, including poor generalization, non-auditable reasoning, and reliance on massive, low-quality datasets. To address these challenges, we propose Multimodal Large Language Models (MFAD) for face anti-spoofing detection, an explainable reasoning system for Unified Face Anti-Spoofing Detection (UFAD), accompanied by a semantic-level annotation benchmark. Unlike methods relying on external tools or coarse alignment, MFAD activates the intrinsic reasoning capabilities of Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) via a fine-grained pixel-semantic anchoring mechanism. This eliminates localization hallucinations and ensures auditable reasoning paths. We introduce a cross-attack semantic-level unified annotation paradigm: by annotating only 1,000 precise masks per attack category, we generate reasoning evidence chains strictly corresponding to spoofed regions. Supervised fine-tuning on the Qwen-VL foundation model demonstrates that, using limited high-quality samples, the system achieves a 40-50% relative reduction in in-domain ACER and restricts cross-domain performance degradation to within 11.62%/5.23%, significantly outperforming existing frameworks. Furthermore, under white-box adversarial attacks, detection accuracy drops by only 3.2%, validating the robustness of semantic anchoring compared to models trained on massive short-text data. Domain practitioners rated the evidence reliability of reasoning paths at 4.57/5, with inference latency satisfying real-time deployment requirements. These results confirm that a few-shot, high-quality semantic annotation paradigm is effective for building trustworthy, explainable, and cost-efficient UFAD systems.
Current evaluations of Large Language Models (LLMs) on logical fallacy detection focus on predicted labels, but do not establish whether those labels are supported by the reasoning the models provide. We propose ForEx (Formal Verification for Explainable Reasoning), a framework that translates LLM-generated explanations into Lean4 and verifies whether the translated rationale is derivable under encoded premises, not the logical validity of the original natural language argument. To distinguish prediction outcomes from the formal status of the supporting reasoning, we introduce the LLM Argument Verification Matrix, which separates label consistency from formal verification status. Experiments on LOGIC-Climate show that over 90% of LLM outputs can be translated into formal reasoning chains that pass verification, while agreement with human annotations remains around 20%. These results expose a systematic gap between formal derivability and label agreement, a distinction invisible to prediction-based metrics. ForEx moves LLM evaluation beyond label correctness toward machine-checkable analysis of formalized reasoning chains.