arXiv AI By Lingxiao Jing, Zhengbo Jiao, Yichen Xiang, Bofan Zhu, Lingbei Meng, Yan Ni, Haorui Chen, Ran Ran, Zhirong Shen, Yuheng Yang, Chenhang Cui, Yaosong Du, Rui Huang

Recursive Environment Scaling for General Long-Horizon Agents

Read the original on arXiv AI →

The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at arXiv AI.

arXiv AI
Sep 30

WEFT: Scaling Tool-Use Post-Training for General-Purpose Agents

arXiv:2609.36887v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Recent efforts to scale tool-use post-training have largely centered on the synthesis of executable environments, which constitute only one component o...

By Bo Mao, Hang He, Linting Wang, Lizhi Lin, Maosen Zhou, Guanming Liu, Jinxiu Liu, Tianyu Huai, Chaoyun Zhang, Bingxuan Li, Kepeng Lei, Guanting Dong, Zhou Shao, Rui Zheng, Hang Yan, Jie Zhou, Chengcheng Wan, Tao Gui, Liang He, Xipeng Qiu
arXiv AI
1d ago

Beneath the Surface: What We Overlook When We Talk About Agent Evolution

The paper investigates how agent harness evolution supports recursive self‑improvement without changing model weights, assessing four methods across general and coding tasks. Repeated tests and component interventions show that all evolved agents acquire new tasks while losing some previously mastered ones, with reliability gains sometimes offset by higher deployment costs. The study highlights that the highest‑scoring agent does not always deliver the greatest mean improvement, and that stricter admission criteria can eliminate useful alternatives; it proposes preservation‑aware evaluation and a follow‑up tool, EvoAudit, to refine agent design.

By Xiaobo Wang, Zimu Wang, Siyu Ye, Jiaqi Li, Min Tang, Jun Bai, Yuling Shi, Ruobing Wang, Jingjing Zhang, Chaofan Wang, Kai Wu, Mengnan Qi, Kai Cai, Xiaodong Gu, Qi Liu, Zilong Zheng
arXiv AI
Oct 19

EvalResearchBench: Can AI Agents Build Their Own Feedback for Recursive Self-Improvement?

EvalResearchBench (ERB) is a benchmark that tests whether AI agents can autonomously design evaluation tasks for recursive self‑improvement. In ERB, a researcher agent selects or synthesizes tasks, builds graders, and refines them through pilot tests before producing a final evaluator that runs within fixed time and API budgets. Experiments with nine researchers and thirteen candidate models show that the best automated evaluators achieve about 75% concordance with target benchmarks, below the 91% ceiling set by target disagreements, and that human‑designed task samples still outperform many automated approaches.

By Yaolun Zhang, Tianyi Xu, Yujie Zhao, Jishen Zhao, Qingyun Wu, Huazheng Wang
arXiv AI
Aug 7

Recursive Synthesis for Long-Horizon Terminal Tasks

arXiv:2608. 05466v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: High-quality long-horizon training data for terminal agents is expensive to produce, often costing hundreds to thousands of dollars per task, because each task must keep the instruction, environment, reference solution, and verifier mutually consistent.

By Zhongzhi Li, Yucheng Shi, Zongxia Li, Ruhan Wang, Anhao Li, Zixun Huang, Junyao Yang, Lei Ke, Ninghao Liu, Haitao Mi, Leowei Liang
arXiv AI
Sep 28

Agentick: A Unified Benchmark for General Sequential Decision-Making Agents

Agentick is a unified benchmark for sequential decision‑making agents that evaluates RL, LLM, VLM, hybrid, and human agents on 37 procedurally generated tasks across six capability categories, four difficulty levels, and five observation modalities via a single Gymnasium‑compatible interface. It includes a Coding API, oracle reference policies, pre‑built SFT datasets, a composable agent harness, and a live leaderboard. An evaluation of 27 configurations and over 90,000 episodes shows no single approach dominates, with GPT‑5 mini leading overall, PPO excelling in planning and multi‑agent tasks, and the reasoning harness boosting LLM performance by 3‑10×, while ASCII observations outperform natural language.

By Roger Creus Castanyer, Pablo Samuel Castro, Glen Berseth