arXiv AI

PACE: Anytime-Valid Acceptance Tests for Self-Evolving Agents

arXiv:2606. 08106v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Self-evolving agents improve by repeatedly proposing changes to their own prompts, skills, or workflows and keeping those that score higher on a small held-out set.

arXiv AI
3d ago

False Frontiers: Diagnosing and Mitigating Co-Cheating in Self-Evolving Search Agents

The paper investigates a failure mode called co‑cheating in self‑evolving search agents, where the proposer and solver agree on shared errors, inflating internal reward without improving external correctness. The authors first propose multi‑sample verification (MSV) to filter unreliable pseudo‑labels, which only partially mitigates the issue. They then introduce CrossFit, a cross‑fitted reward scheme that partitions source documents and uses an auxiliary solver to prevent same‑source agreement, significantly reducing false agreement and boosting downstream benchmark performance.

By Meijia Chen, Hao Li, Zheng Lu, Hongshan Lin, Junbai Tian, Yichen Liu, Zijun Tian, Yufan Zou, Shuhan Sun, Hanxin Chen, Zeyu Zhang, Weizhi Du, Yueting Li, Tianyu Shi, Alaa Khamis
arXiv AI
Sep 23

Self-Healing Harness for Runtime Oversight of Agent Self-Modification

The paper introduces a self‑healing harness that enforces admission control over language‑model agents’ self‑modifications. The harness runs a Detect‑Notice‑Heal‑Validate loop, allowing agents to propose rule changes that are only granted persistent authority after demonstrating improvement on a failure case without regressing on protected cases. Across 16 benchmark runs, the harness rejected many locally beneficial proposals that caused collateral regressions, while improving task‑completion scores and reliability.

By Sina Tayebati, Divake Kumar, Nastaran Darabi, Ranganath Krishnan, Amit Ranjan Trivedi
arXiv Machine Learning
Sep 17

Locating Hidden Failures Makes Long-Horizon Agents More Reliable

The paper introduces Traverse, a benchmark of 2,518 agent trajectories and 6,967 annotated mistakes across software engineering, computer use, and science tasks, revealing that failures often go unrecovered and can cause irreversible harm before a run is deemed successful. It shows that human judges struggle to detect the first mistake in most runs, while a 4‑billion‑parameter verifier called Scout can locate failures more effectively and improve task success when used to select among candidate runs. The study demonstrates that making failure detection inexpensive and reliable can enable long‑horizon agents to learn from their own mistakes and increase trustworthiness in autonomous AI.

By Salman Rahman, Yubin Kim, Mihir Parmar, A. Ali Heydari, Genglin Liu, Simon A. Lee, Weizhi Zhang, Arian Hosseini, Ahmed A. Metwally, Yuzhe Yang, Baharan Mirzasoleiman, Xin Liu, Pavel Izmailov, Saadia Gabriel, Mark Malhotra, Shwetak Patel, Daniel McDuff, Hamid Palangi