Survival is the Only Reward: Sustainable Self-Training Through Environment-Mediated Selection

Self-play reinforcement learning trains language models on their own generated tasks, co-evolving a proposer and solver without human labels. Recent systems report strong reasoning gains, but collapse and instability are widely observed and poorly understood. The dominant response treats this as a reward-design problem. We argue instead that self-play stability is governed by two distinct levers: a data-level gate that decides which proposer-generated tasks enter the training pool, and the reward signal that updates the policy on tasks already admitted. Through controlled experiments on a Python output-prediction task and a deterministic-DSL twin task that strips pretraining priors, output ambiguity, and executor noise, we find the two levers are asymmetric. A strict gate is sufficient for stability under every reward variant we test, including a self-consistency reward with no access to ground truth; while no reward variant is sufficient once the gate is removed. This asymmetry exposes a counter-intuitive coupling we call the Grounded Proposer Paradox: a proposer with ground-truth access accelerates collapse faster than an ungrounded one when paired with a self-consistency solver, by concentrating training on clean tasks that form the fastest path to a spurious self-consistent attractor. Replacing the binary gate with a continuous strictness parameter $\varepsilon$ further reveals a two-stage phase transition: training-side metrics decouple at low $\varepsilon$, while validation accuracy holds until $\varepsilon$ is much higher. Data-level gating, not reward calibration, is the binding constraint on self-play stability.

Self-evolving agents advance toward autonomy by optimizing their harness---prompts, skills, tools, and execution logic---based on environmental feedback. This paradigm, however, is hampered by three challenges: \textit{credit assignment failure}, where terminal success/failure feedback makes it ambiguous which step caused the error; \textit{shortcut learning}, where agents memorize task-specific patterns rather than acquire generalizable capabilities; and \textit{catastrophic forgetting}, where unguarded updates degrade previously acquired competence. In this paper, we introduce HarnessEvolve, a self-evolving framework that learns from reference trajectories to achieve reliable agent self-evolution. HarnessEvolve decouples the execution agent from the evolutionary pipeline, assigning execution, evaluation, optimization, and gating to independent agent modules, enabling generalizable and stable harness improvements. Specifically, HarnessEvolve overcomes credit assignment failure by generating reference trajectories (execution paths produced when given the ground-truth answers) and aligning failed executions against them to extract error signals, which are clustered to reveal systematic failure patterns. To prevent shortcut learning and catastrophic forgetting, candidate harness updates must pass two gates: a quality gate that filters data leakage and prompt bloat, and a performance gate that accepts each update if it improves on the current batch without degrading recent batches, with epoch-end validation on a held-out set selecting the best-performing accepted agent snapshot. We conduct extensive experiments on several benchmarks spanning open-domain and enterprise scenarios, using different models and agent frameworks. Results demonstrate that HarnessEvolve consistently outperforms state-of-the-art baselines across all benchmarks and settings, confirming reliability across task domains.

In harness self-evolution, agents modify their own prompts, code, tools, and orchestration while keeping the underlying language model fixed. Recent work has shown that agents can improve themselves in response to task failures and achieve substantial performance gains. However, gains on failed tasks do not automatically ensure that performance on previously successful tasks is preserved, raising concerns about reliable adoption. In this work, we provide a theoretically grounded condition under which a self-evolved harness can be reliably adopted. We then propose a validation rule to make the evolved system satisfy the reliable adoption condition with theoretical guarantees. Consequently, the system can achieve progressive improvement through evolution. This leads to a natural question: Does reliable self-evolution have a performance ceiling, and which factors govern this ceiling? Our theoretical results show that the performance ceiling is determined by the costs of verification and evaluation. On the other hand, self-evolution may stall in practice. In this regard, we show that experimental evidence on agent performance shifts can be used to identify the sources of stagnation. Our work thus establishes a theoretical framework for understanding and advancing reliable harness self-evolution.