Artificial learning systems are graduating from passive learners to increasingly autonomous agents, lending pragmatic urgency to the question of what constitutes agency. Reinforcement learning (RL) offers arguably the most explicit formulation of agent-environment interaction, built on three core tenets: the environment as a Markov decision process, learning as policy optimization, and the agent as a maximizer of scalar reward. Recent work has called to revise these tenets: reconceptualizing learning as adaptation rather than optimization, broadening goals beyond scalar reward, and noting the absence of a formal theory of the agent in a formalism that so heavily emphasizes the environment. We argue that the artificial life community is uniquely positioned to illuminate this critique and concretize an alternative. We draw on open-ended novelty search as a complementary model of adaptation and goal-directed behavior beyond reward optimization, and ground such evolutionary dynamics in thermodynamic theories of origin-of-life and agency, toward a more biologically faithful and formally grounded account of what it is to be an adaptive agent.
Large Language Models demonstrate remarkable proficiency in static reasoning, yet training them as autonomous agents through Reinforcement Learning (RL) for long-horizon tasks is often hindered by severe reward sparsity. While conventional \textit{agent-side warming} up via supervised fine-tuning (SFT) can alleviate this, it is frequently limited by data scarcity and constrained exploration. To address this, we propose a paradigm shift to \textit{environment-side adaptation} by constructing \textbf{F}eedback-\textbf{E}nriched \textbf{E}nvironments (\textbf{FEEs}). Through a pilot study, we establish a feedback design strategy that reformulates environments by transitioning from action guidance to observation enrichment during the later stages of both intra-episode exploration and inter-episode evolution. Large-scale experiments on SciWorld and BFCL benchmarks using various Qwen3 model scales and RL algorithms such as GRPO, GSPO, and DAPO demonstrate that FEEs consistently yield performance improvements over standard settings. Furthermore, our analysis reveals that training with FEEs \textbf{(1)} stabilizes training dynamics by reducing entropy volatility, \textbf{(2)} facilitates proactive state-space exploration in difficult tasks, \textbf{(3) }ensures the internalization of environmental guidance into policy weights rather than acting as a mere inference-time prior, and \textbf{(4) }identifies intra-group feedback consistency as a critical boundary for stable optimization.
Reinforcement learning (RL) is primarily known as a computational method for optimizing control tasks, but it is increasingly used to explain biological behavior. While RL successfully captures key aspects of biology, a major gap remains: between-agent behavioral variability. Consistent individual differences naturally permeate biological populations, yet RL models typically present only the single best individual or the population average. Addressing this gap requires moving beyond current practices to generate behavioral diversity using biologically plausible mechanisms. Here, we examine approaches from various subfields of RL and outline potential paths forward to close the gap between biology and simulation.
Patrick Govoni, Palina Bartashevich, Clémence Bergerot +3
A hallmark of life on Earth is the ability of agents to exert causal power and be drivers of subsequent events. This is key to cognition at all scales. Causal emergence, measuring the degree to which an agent exerts unique predictive power on its future, is one consequence of causal power. Indeed, recent discoveries have shown that biological agents, even minimal ones, increase their causal emergence after learning new memories. However, there is a major knowledge gap regarding how causally emergent artificial agents are. We focused on Reinforcement Learning (RL) of neural-network agents across an array of environmental conditions, encompassing different algorithms, agent architectures, and six environments arranged on a complexity spectrum. For consistency, we computed the causal emergence of their latent-space representations over their lifetimes. We used the recently proposed ΦID to estimate causal emergence and tested how it related to learning performance. Our results suggested a Causally Emergent Alignment Hypothesis: successful agents exhibited causal emergence that was consistently predictive of final reward early in training and whose representational dynamics aligned with reward improvement in most tasks. This idea suggests that causal emergence may be a previously undisclosed axis of reorganization of neural representations in RL agents, with the potential to establish causal relationships and interventions that will lead to better RL agents. Our work also highlights the alignment between causal emergence and learning as another way biological and artificial creatures compare.