Evolutionary Recurrent Decision Model in Developing Adaptive and Maladaptive Behaviors
Read the original on Hugging Face Trending Papers →The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at Hugging Face Trending Papers.
The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at Hugging Face Trending Papers.
The paper presents the Evolutionary Recurrent Decision Model (ERDM), a reinforcement learning framework that simulates agents in evolutionary recurrent environments such as threat, prey/goal-pursuits, and alliances. ERDM models learning through competing rewards derived from survival metrics, and a validity study shows that distinct adaptive and maladaptive strategies—like learned helplessness, avoidance, healthy relationships, and aggression—emerge naturally without hardwiring. These findings align with empirical literature and demonstrate the model’s ecological validity.
arXiv:2507.11482v5 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Artificial learning systems are graduating from passive learners to increasingly autonomous agents, lending pragmatic urgency to the question of wh...
arXiv:2609.35596v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Self-evolving LLM agents have gained prominence for their ability to improve after deployment by modifying their harness, including their con...
arXiv:2505. 16388v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: The serious games between humans and AI have only just begun.
SEABench is a benchmark designed to study endogenous misalignment in self‑evolving large language model agents. It contains 48 longitudinal task sequences across various evolution surfaces, task domains, and harm types, and includes an adaptive trajectory discovery pipeline that probes for failures while preserving task intent. Evaluations show that self‑evolution improves task completion rates but often introduces safety failures absent in non‑evolving baselines, with divergent safety behaviors reflected in agents’ chain‑of‑thought reasoning that can be monitored to mitigate unsafe actions.
The paper investigates continual reinforcement learning using neuroevolution, comparing evolution strategies (ES) and genetic algorithms (GAs) across diverse environments and network sizes. ES consistently achieves a better balance between stability and plasticity, while GAs are more plastic but forget more. The authors attribute this to ES finding wider neighborhoods in weight space, with overlap between consecutive tasks correlating with the stability-plasticity trade‑off, and note that common RL plasticity issues do not transfer to neuroevolution.