arXiv:2608. 03222v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Software engineering (SWE) agents resolve repository-level issues through long trajectories that grow increasingly expensive as context accumulates.
By Chenyu Wang, Yunbo Lyu, Junda He, Zhou Yang, Chenxing Zhong, Yaniv Harel, David Lo
Software engineering (SWE) agents resolve repository-level issues through long trajectories that grow increasingly expensive as context accumulates. Failed runs tend to be longer and exhibit redundant exploration or looping, suggesting that some failures may be detectable before completion.
The Agent Error Dataset (AED) presents 50,228 error–diagnosis pairs collected from 9,961 source tasks across 33 environments, 19 harness families, and 23 policy models in text‑based agent systems. A five‑stage Agentic Error‑to‑Training (AET) pipeline generates diagnoses and proposed corrections, verifies them against recorded evidence, and creates separate training views for diagnosis and actor recovery. Experiments show that first‑proposal corrections improve verifier pass rates from 18.4% to 51.1%, and fine‑tuning with full‑diagnosis data raises Qwen3‑8B’s exact‑step agreement from 47.2% to 63.6% on a holdout set.
By Kunlun Zhu, Xuyan Ye, Yibo Li, Cheng Qian, Beibin Li, Heng Ji
PROOF-Gen is a method that improves distillation of tool‑calling models by recovering successful trajectories from teacher failures. It uses per‑scenario prompt optimization to generate corrective guidance that steers the teacher to a passing trajectory, then removes this guidance before training so the student learns from clean demonstrations. On τ2‑bench, PROOF-Gen recovers 93% of failed scenarios, boosting Qwen3‑4B‑Instruct‑2507’s Pass^1 from 0.132 to 0.529 and improving Gemma 4 E4B‑it by 7.2pp on BFCL v4 multi‑turn, while also raising deployed on‑device model performance by up to 5.0pp across response‑quality metrics.
By Anh Ta, Junjie Zhu, Shahin Shayandeh
arXiv:2608. 08570v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Rejection sampling fine-tuning (RFT) is widely used to train code agents by generating trajectories on verifiable software engineering tasks, retaining those that pass the tests, and fine-tuning on the successful rollouts.
By Dongyi Lv, Fushun E, Aichen Cai, Liang Huang, Ya Zhang, Qiuyu Ding, Canhui Wu, Zhi Wang, Yuesong Zhang, Jiaqi Wang, Nan Duan
arXiv:2608. 11977v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Tool-using LLM agents are commonly trained and evaluated in environments where tool calls succeed reliably, yet deployed tools can fail transiently, persistently, or silently.
By Chaoran Chen, Vy Nguyen, Ziji Zhang, Abhinav Gullapalli, Ziyi Wang, Yuxuan Lu, Dakuo Wang, Jing Huang, Zhou Yu, Jin Lai
The paper introduces checkpoint handoff, an evaluation protocol that separates an agent’s ability to reach useful states from its ability to complete tasks in reinforcement learning. By using one checkpoint as a reacher up to a handoff point and another as a solver from the same replayed history, the authors can measure Reach (how often states within a fixed number of actions from success are achieved) and Solve (how often the task is completed from those states). Experiments on TravelPlanner and ALFWorld show that switching the solver from supervised fine‑tuning to RL yields larger gains when RL is used as the reacher, indicating that RL more effectively finds solvable states.
By Xuan Liu, Jingbin Qian
arXiv:2606. 01619v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Agentic reinforcement learning (RL) enables LLM agents to improve continuously from environment rewards, yet the resulting policies do not systematically accumulate reusable strategies that generalize across tasks.
By Zelin He, Haotian Lin, Boran Han, Wei Zhu, Haoyang Fang, Bernie Wang, Xuan Zhu, Runze Li, Matthew Reimherr
The paper introduces a new evaluation protocol called checkpoint handoff to disentangle the contributions of reaching a target state and solving the task in reinforcement learning agents. By cloning states reached by one checkpoint and handing them to another without retraining, the authors separate the REACH metric (how often a policy arrives at a state confirmed to be a fixed number of actions from success) from the SOLVE metric (how often it finishes from that identical state). Across two benchmarks and pipelines, the analysis shows that RL history benefits RL solvers more than SFT solvers, and that independent REACH and SOLVE gaps predict overall performance.
By Xuan Liu, Jingbin Qian
LEGO-RL is a framework that connects native coding-agent harnesses with scalable policy‑gradient training without altering the harnesses’ internal flow. It achieves faithful optimization through in‑process LLM proxying, reliable execution via sandbox orchestration, and observable training with automated validation and a Live UI. Experiments show LEGO‑RL improves the Qwen3.5‑35B‑A3B model’s performance on three native harnesses while preserving high rollout‑training probability correlation.
By Yiming Du, Yuxin Jiang, Tao Yuan, Jianbo Dai, Shaowei Wang, Jierun Chen, Chaofan Tao, Xianzhi Yu, Lifeng Shang, Kam-Fai Wong, Xiaohui Li, Haoli Bai
arXiv:2608. 14635v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language model (LLM) agents are increasingly trained with reinforcement learning in long-horizon, sandboxed environments.
By Jiecheng Zhou, Qinghao Hu, Peng Sun, Xingcheng Zhang, Weiming Zhang
arXiv:2609.33875v2 Announce Type: replace-cross
Abstract: Outcome-only reinforcement learning gives software engineering (SWE) agents a terminal success signal but little direct guidance about interm...
By Yuanhao Li, Hongbo Wang, Xuhong Chen, Yiming Cao, Xunzhu Tang