arXiv AI

Task-CoEvolve: Efficient Harness Optimization via Adaptive Validation Task Selection

arXiv:2608. 20169v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: We present a novel approach to efficient LLM agent harness optimization through adaptive validation task selection.

arXiv AI
Aug 7

HarnessOpt-Bench: Evaluating LLMs at Harness Optimization

arXiv:2608. 06301v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: As LLMs are increasingly deployed within agentic systems, their capabilities depend not only on the model weights but also on the harness: the prompts, tools, control flow, memory, and orchestration code surrounding them.

By Varun Ursekar, Apaar Shanker, Yash Maurya, Shehab Yasser, Vijay S. Kalmath, Veronica Chatrath, Yuan Xue
arXiv AI
Oct 1

Self-Evolving Harness on Multiple Tasks with the Agent as Its Own Optimizer

The paper introduces a self‑evolving harness framework where a frozen language‑model agent first solves tasks and then edits its own harness based on run records. Using a 49‑line seed harness, the evolved harness improves average scores on in‑distribution benchmarks by 4.48 points and on out‑of‑distribution benchmarks by 12.64 points, surpassing Codex on the former and matching it on the latter. Continued evolution on a specific out‑of‑distribution benchmark further raises performance, and the study analyzes emergent mechanisms such as output truncation and history compaction.

By Qiankai Xu
arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 15

ModularRSI: Modular and Generalizable Recursive Harness Self-Improvement

arXiv:2609.14857v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Recent work extends recursive self-improvement (RSI) to agent harnesses for long-horizon coding and terminal tasks, enabling agents to improve executio...

By Siwei Wu, Jincheng Ren, Yizhi Li, Haau-Sing Li, Chengran Yang, Yuxuan Zhang, Weicheng Gu, Jian Yang, Riza Batista-Navarro, Chuanyi Zhang, Xianglong Liu, Ming Zhou, Bryan Dai, Chenghua Lin
arXiv Machine Learning
Jul 30

SkillRise: Agentic Reinforcement Learning for Cross-Task Skill Evolution

arXiv:2607. 26784v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language model agents often encounter related yet distinct tasks that share reusable solution patterns.

By Zhiyuan Yao, Yuxin Chen, Zhengxi Lu, Zishan Xu, Yueqing Sun, Yifu Guo, Yuquan Lu, Zhengzhou Cai, Kangning Zhang, Zhuowen Han, Zi-Han Wang, Ziang Ye, Qi Gu, Xunliang Cai, Weiwen Liu, Yongliang Shen
arXiv AI
Aug 28

Verify Smarter, Evolve Further: Efficient Harness Evolution through Behavior-Aware Verification

The paper introduces HarnessLens, a budget‑aware framework that evolves language‑model agent harnesses by jointly exploring task spaces and user‑configurable components. It derives candidate modifications from execution trajectories and selectively verifies them on behavior‑relevant tasks using an attributable‑evidence gate, thereby avoiding wasteful rollouts on unrelated behaviors. Experiments on three harnesses and four benchmarks show that HarnessLens improves held‑out performance by 7.6‑13.6% while using less evaluation budget than existing methods.

By Jinghan Xu, Yikai Zhang, Aili Chen, Weiyuan Li, Jiaqing Liang, Deqing Yang
arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 2

HarnessDev: Can LLMs Create and Evolve Their Own Agent Harness?

arXiv:2609.01437v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: As agents move from research prototypes to deployed tools, their capability increasingly depends on model-external execution infrastructure, commonly...

By Yuhao Wu, Jingyuan Zhang, Jiajun Shi, Xinping Lei, Qingshui Gu, Yuxuan Zhang, Zexuan Wang, Chen He, Chen Huang, Maojia Song, Zhiyuan Zeng, Shaowen Wang, Jinkai Liu, Yunfeng Shi, Jiaheng Liu, Shen Yan, Wenhao Huang, Ge Zhang, Wenxuan Zhang
arXiv Machine Learning
Sep 25

Automatic Harness Evolution for Hardware Design Verification: Can LLMs Consolidate Gains Across Discovered Harnesses?

The study investigates whether large language models (LLMs) can automatically improve the harnesses used for hardware design verification. By evolving harnesses around a fixed subject model on 12 proprietary root‑cause localization tasks, the researchers found that automatically evolved harnesses increased completed attempts by 71‑76% and task coverage by 80‑100%, though overall correct attempts improved only 18‑24%. Despite these gains, the evolved harnesses did not consistently consolidate into a single dominant solution across tasks and metrics, and a separate cross‑benchmark case showed that a repair harness could yield a 35.6% increase in functional passes over a baseline.

By Kidus Seyoum, Ajay Mittur