A Fresh Look at Lamarckian Evolution and the Baldwin Effect

LLM-guided evolutionary search (Evolve systems) has reached state-of-the-art results on mathematical and combinatorial tasks, yet most existing systems report only the best of many runs and leave the run-to-run distribution undocumented. We ask how a fixed budget of LLM calls should be allocated, and how reliably a single run reaches the reported numbers. Sweeping the depth-breadth grid over five models and three tasks, we identify two empirical regularities: a fitness-compute envelope along which capability ordering largely collapses on effective FLOPs, and a bilinear depth-breadth fit with task-specific interaction; both are gated by model-task capability. Motivated by these regularities, we propose BaSE (Bandit-based Self-Evolving), a multi-armed bandit that allocates LLM calls across parallel trajectories. Without changing the model, prompt, or evaluator, BaSE improves mean fitness by 12.3% over the strongest island-protocol baseline across 8 (model, task) cells, with the largest gains on high-variance settings: a reliability gain from allocation alone.

LLM-guided evolutionary methods such as AlphaEvolve have proven effective in domains like math, systems research, and algorithmic discovery, but their reliance on frontier models makes each run expensive. We argue this is largely an artifact of how existing frameworks allocate search: archives that fail to preserve solution diversity force compensation through stronger mutation models; blind model use spends frontier dollars on local edits a smaller model could handle; and full-set evaluation wastes rollouts on redundant examples. We introduce LEVI, a harness-first evolutionary framework built on the bet that stronger search architectures can substitute for or even outperform larger LLMs in evolutionary search. LEVI improves on three core components of evolutionary search: a solution database that establishes diversity from the beginning, and then maintains it throughout the run; a smarter mutation router that plays into the strengths of large and small LLMs; and a rank-preserving proxy benchmark for rollout-heavy settings. Across systems-research benchmarks LEVI attains the highest score on a budget 3.3-6.7x smaller than the published frontier-model runs of existing frameworks like ShinkaEvolve, GEPA, and AdaEvolve; on one problem, LEVI matches the existing best at a 35x lower cost. On prompt optimization, LEVI matches or exceeds GEPA at less than half of its rollout budget on four different benchmarks. LEVI is available as an open-source framework at https://github.com/ttanv/levi.

Evolutionary computation has long promised to deliver both high-performance optimization tools as well as rigorous scientific simulations of Darwinian evolution. However, modern algorithms frequently abandon evolutionary fidelity for physics-inspired heuristics or superficial biological metaphors. This paper derives a suite of advanced gradient-based optimization algorithms directly from evolutionary first principles. We introduce Darwinian Lineage Simulations (DLS) to prove that, in an asexual context, Fisher's and Wright's historically opposed views of evolution are actually formally equivalent; One can partition Fisher's deterministically-evolving total population into Wright's randomly-drifting sub-populations. We prove that proper bookkeeping requires introducing a specific kind of structured noise (the DLS noise relation). Crucially, any bookkeeping choices which satisfy this relation will yield a faithful simulation of evolution. Using this vast representational freedom, we prove that a broad family of battle-tested optimization algorithms are already perfectly compatible with evolutionary dynamics. These include: Stochastic Gradient Descent as well as many regularizations/approximations of Newton's method and Natural Gradient Descent. By simply adding DLS noise (i.e., evolutionarily faithful genetic drift), these algorithms become scientifically valid in silico simulations of Darwinian evolution. Finally, we demonstrate that even the state-of-the-art Adam optimizer can be brought into evolutionary compliance through a minor mathematical surgery.