arXiv:2610.18842v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Robots are increasingly autonomous in task execution, yet their improvement remains largely human-driven. This study investigates Physical Recursive Se...
The paper argues that evaluating agents as fixed models is insufficient, proposing instead to treat them as configurable systems. Using a new benchmark of four scientific tasks, the authors analyze how five configuration aspects—task information, reasoning, self‑verification, time budget, and backbone model—affect performance, noting that about 54% of outcome variance arises from run‑to‑run differences even with the same settings. The study finds that providing more task information has the strongest impact, while interactions among settings (e.g., extra time only helps with adequate information or model capability) and the choice of verification tools significantly shape agent behavior.
arXiv:2608. 05519v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Agent benchmarks usually measure task completion and treat resource use as an auxiliary statistic.
arXiv:2610.16397v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: We study environment scaling as a way to increase agent-benchmark difficulty while holding core task objectives fixed. Our framework, Recursive Environ...
RSIGym is a new agent-native research environment built on Everything as a Service (EaaS) that exposes training, inference, rollout, evaluation, and sandbox execution through reusable services. It supports shared budget and permission controls for Data, Harness, and Joint improvement tracks, allowing agents to investigate individual interventions and jointly optimize data, training settings, and execution harnesses within the same environment. Using RSIGym, the Opus 5 model achieved the highest RSI-Index of 0.4809 across five benchmarks, improving performance on software engineering, terminal interaction, mathematics, scientific reasoning, and skill-based tasks.
The paper discusses recursive self‑improvement (RSI) in physical AI, where a system not only enhances its behavior but also the methods it uses to improve. It reviews how robot learning can evolve both capabilities and improvement processes, highlighting that gains persist only when feedback addresses remaining learning needs, the component can apply the change, the value survives task or hardware shifts, and practice remains safe and affordable. Current physical studies mainly show behavioral and procedural gains, but have not yet isolated recursive benefits, leading the authors to propose evaluation principles and future research directions for safely trial‑by‑trial self‑improvement.
arXiv:2610.20474v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Pretrained vision-language-action models (VLAs) often fail midway through unseen long-horizon tasks. Recursive self-improvement (RSI) offers a remedy,...
arXiv:2610.18083v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Scaling recursive self-improvement requires additional computation to produce useful research progress in reaching persistent objectives. Intuitively,...
arXiv:2610.14224v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: LLM agents' capabilities depend not only on their underlying models but also on their execution harnesses. Recursive self-improvement (RSI) offers a pr...
arXiv:2609.35561v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Recursive self-improvement (RSI) seeks to enable AI systems to participate in improving their own capabilities. A concrete pathway is autonomous mo...
SelfImprove-Bench is an evaluation framework for recursively self‑improving (RSI) systems that organizes tasks into three core capabilities—Exploring, Planning, and Reasoning—using game‑based scenarios for controllability and reproducibility. It employs scalable task generation and orchestration driven by templates and difficulty coefficients, and introduces a generalization ladder (G0–G4) to assess how well performance gains transfer beyond training conditions. Experiments show that current RSI methods exhibit inconsistent evolutionary gains across these generalization levels.
A-RSI is a method for zero‑data multimodal self‑improvement that separates the decision of when to refresh training experience from the generation of new tasks. It monitors reward variation and accuracy in training logs to trigger task pool refreshes without relying on validation or test scores. The approach uses a static library of model‑authored programs to generate multimodal questions and verify answers, achieving a performance increase from 57.77 to 61.05 on an eleven‑benchmark suite with 800 fresh tasks.