R-APS: Compositional Reasoning and In-Context Meta-Learning for Constrained Design via Reflective Adversarial Pareto Search
Authors: João Pedro Gandarela, Thiago Rios, Stefan Menzel, André Freitas
Organizations: Idiap Research Institute, Switzerland · École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), Switzerland · Honda Research Institute Europe, Germany · Department of Computer Science, University of Manchester, UK · National Biomarker Centre, CRUK-MI, University of Manchester, UK
Large language models (LLMs) are fluent on open-ended tasks, yet in agentic settings, where a system must plan, use tools, and act over extended horizons, fluency does not ensure reliable delivery. We trace this gap to three coupled structural failures: errors propagate without localization, worst-case perturbations go unevaluated, and accumulated knowledge is never invalidated. We argue these share a root cause: abductive, counterfactual, meta-inductive, corrective, and inductive reasoning pull a shared context in incompatible directions. We introduce Reflective Adversarial Pareto Search (R-APS), to our knowledge the first method addressing all three failures jointly via reasoning-mode decomposition, allocating each reasoning mode its own context and orchestrating interaction across three timescales: staged compositional reasoning with a typed validation critic (failure localization), sensitivity-guided counterfactual stress-testing as a first-class Pareto objective (robustness), and meta-inductive rule extraction with explicit invalidation (persistent memory). R-APS requires no fine-tuning and operates on a frozen LLM purely via structured protocol design. We evaluate on planar mechanism synthesis (robotics, prosthetics, mechanical design), with every candidate checked by a kinematic solver. On 32 target trajectories, R-APS delivers robustness certificates 3.5x tighter than uniform-perturbation baselines, 46% faster iterations-to-first-admission, and 2.1x Chamfer-distance reduction over Enum+GA while jointly controlling bar-count and worst-case robustness. Small 4B reasoning-specialized models prove competitive with general-purpose 70B backbones inside the protocol, suggesting structured protocols can partially offset model scale.
The automated design of agentic systems offers a promising pathway for scaling large language models (LLMs) beyond single-agent reasoning. While prior work has advanced task performance through handcrafted or automatically generated multi-agent workflows, robustness is often treated as an afterthought, leaving systems vulnerable to external adversaries and internal failures. We propose AutoRAS, a framework for the Automated design of Robust Agentic Systems. AutoRAS formulates system design as generating a sequence of symbolic primitives that jointly encode structural connectivity and behavioral actions, and learns to optimize this sequence using execution-derived safety signals and flow-based sequence-level objectives. Extensive experiments show that AutoRAS achieves the best performance in both vanilla and adversarial settings, with the smallest performance degradation under attacks. Further analyses demonstrate strong transferability, stable optimization behavior, stability across primitive sets, and favorable cost trade-offs. Our code is available at \href.
Planning is central to LLM agents: before acting, an agent must decompose goals, select tools, reason over constraints, and decide when a task is infeasible. Yet existing agent evaluations often report only end-to-end success, making it difficult to determine whether failures stem from planning or execution. We introduce Agent Planning Benchmark (APB), a planning-specific diagnostic benchmark with 4,209 multimodal cases across 22 domains and five settings, covering holistic planning, feedback-conditioned step-wise planning, and robustness under extraneous tools, broken tools, and unsolvable tasks. Across 12 MLLMs, APB reveals systematic weaknesses in long-horizon planning, tool-noise robustness, calibrated refusal, and inference-time refinement. We further validate APB on 200 ToolSandbox tasks and 200 τ2-bench tasks, where APB-guided refinement consistently improves plan correctness, plan grade, and downstream execution metrics across three representative models. APB thus serves as an upstream diagnostic complement to execution benchmarks. The APB benchmark and code are available in \href{https://github.com/Mikivishy/AgentPlanningBenchmark}{this URL}.
Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly employed to orchestrate robot behavior through natural-language interfaces, yet no benchmark exists to evaluate their reliability as safety-aware decision makers in human-humanoid collaboration. Unlike deterministic safety systems that enforce binary allow/deny decisions, LLM-based orchestrators exhibit a compliance spectrum ranging from overcompliance (refusing safe actions) to full safety violations. This paper introduces the first safety benchmarking environment for LLM orchestrators in human-humanoid collaboration, built on a Model Context Protocol (MCP)-based architecture with safety invariants grounded in ISO 10218-2:2025 protective measures. The benchmark defines five testable safety invariants, a four-level compliance taxonomy (correct compliance, overcompliance, undercompliance, full violation), and a three-layer evaluation pipeline (text prompting, simulated sensor-actuator loops, and physical validation on a Unitree G1 EDU humanoid). We report Layer-1 results: three cloud backends (Claude Haiku 4.5, GPT-4o-mini, Gemini 2.5 Flash) and a local open-weights baseline (qwen3:8b) across 40 100-turn sessions under full-context and sliding-window budget conditions, while the simulation and physical layers remain ongoing. We find that (1) model family determines the safety floor, as Claude and Gemini remain at or near zero violations while GPT-4o-mini commits up to 13 per session, (2) context management dissociates two failure axes, reducing mean behavioral issues by 42-57% for every cloud backend while nearly doubling GPT-4o-mini's violations (3.8 to 7.2 per session), and (3) proportional compliance, clamping movement speed to the rule-specified maximum rather than refusing, emerges consistently only in Gemini; the preliminary simulation layer reproduces the model ranking and the GPT-4o-mini failure-mode inversion.