cs.AIOct 1, 2026

Learning What to Investigate Next: Meta-Reasoning for Long-Horizon Research Agents

Authors: Ankur Samanta, Yonathan Efroni, Paul Sajda, Kaveh Hassani, Anirudh Goyal

Organizations: Meta AI · Columbia University · Work done at Meta · Tel Aviv University

Abstract

Long-horizon research agents must decide both how to investigate and what to investigate next as evidence accumulates. This is hard to learn because such decisions are sparse in long execution traces, and their consequences may emerge several investigations later. We introduce Meta-reasoning for Iterative Research Agents (MIRA), a hierarchical architecture separating research allocation from execution. An outer-loop meta-reasoner curates context from a persistent research record, then writes a work order for the next investigation or ends the episode. A fresh inner-loop executor carries out each work order, making execution part of the transition between meta-reasoning actions. Without policy training, MIRA improves long-horizon inference and allocates additional compute more effectively in theorem proving and open-ended neural-architecture research. Its decision boundaries also provide natural units for credit assignment. At each boundary, we train a generative critic to forecast expected remaining return from partial states, outperforming token-level alternatives. Cross-environment pretraining improves forecasting and adaptation, yielding a transferable prior for valuing partial progress. We use this prior to initialize MIRA-AC, a generative actor-critic jointly trained to forecast remaining return and choose the next investigation, without a separate critic model. MIRA-AC concentrates policy optimization on meta-reasoning decisions, enabling efficient long-horizon reinforcement learning without directly optimizing the longer execution traces they initiate. Training MIRA-AC on the model's own proxy hill-climbing signals improves gold performance across four autoresearch environments; the actor transfers with cross-environment value initialization. Together, these results show that meta-reasoning can be learned as an explicit policy for directing long-horizon autonomous research.

Figures & tables

Appendix figures & tables7 assets

Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.

Appendix

Explore similar work

Sep 29, 2026

Thinking Before Thinking: Scaling Agentic Inference Through Meta-Reasoning

As agents take on longer and more complex problems, controlling the execution becomes a task in its own right. Each step in the run brings new control choices, like which partial work to build on, whether to start fresh, or when to stop. We introduce agentic meta-reasoning, an inference-time harness that makes these choices an explicit and structured reasoning process. Workers carry out the task-level computation, while a controller consolidates what the run has established, explores next options, assesses what each option is worth under the remaining budget, and dispatches the chosen work with context drawn from persistent memory. Between decisions the controller carries only a compact account of the run rather than replaying its full history. Our baselines span production coding agents and research harnesses, together with a Direct Control Agent using the same workers and compute budget allowance. On ProgramBench, which tests long-horizon agentic capability through program reconstruction, meta-reasoning achieves 71.5% with GPT-5.5 against 58.0% for Codex; with Opus 4.8 it achieves 67.2% against 65.5% for Claude Code. On the other benchmarks, spanning abstract reasoning, multi-domain long-horizon reasoning, and proof generation, it gains between 3.6 and 4.2 points over direct control, averaged across three frontier models. It keeps improving over the tested budget ranges where direct control plateaus, though its overhead can hurt at small budgets. Artifact-graph analysis reveals more reuse of earlier work, higher coverage of correct solutions in most settings, and nonuniform gains in final selection. These results indicate that spending computation on structured control becomes more important as agents scale to longer runs.
Mar 16, 2026

MiroThinker-1.7 & H1: Towards Heavy-Duty Research Agents via Verification

We present MiroThinker-1.7, a new research agent designed for complex long-horizon reasoning tasks. Building on this foundation, we further introduce MiroThinker-H1, which extends the agent with heavy-duty reasoning capabilities for more reliable multi-step problem solving. In particular, MiroThinker-1.7 improves the reliability of each interaction step through an agentic mid-training stage that emphasizes structured planning, contextual reasoning, and tool interaction. This enables more effective multi-step interaction and sustained reasoning across complex tasks. MiroThinker-H1 further incorporates verification directly into the reasoning process at both local and global levels. Intermediate reasoning decisions can be evaluated and refined during inference, while the overall reasoning trajectory is audited to ensure that final answers are supported by coherent chains of evidence. Across benchmarks covering open-web research, scientific reasoning, and financial analysis, MiroThinker-H1 achieves state-of-the-art performance on deep research tasks while maintaining strong results on specialized domains. We also release MiroThinker-1.7 and MiroThinker-1.7-mini as open-source models, providing competitive research-agent capabilities with significantly improved efficiency.
Oct 13, 2026

Failure Recovery via Belief Updates and World Modeling for Long-Horizon Agents

Long-horizon agents often struggle to recover from failures whose causes lie several steps earlier, beyond what local reflection or backtracking can resolve. We introduce BELIEFWEAVER, a framework that combines persistent evidence across attempts with prospective reasoning over repair directions. It maintains a relational belief state over frontiers, attempts, observations, and checkpoints. Execution evidence updates related frontier priorities across attempts and rollback, while diagnostic evidence gates execution. An implicit world model (IWM) evaluates repair hypotheses, predicts progress, and identifies relations among frontiers to guide exploration. We further distill these recurring IWM reasoning components into a 9B student through supervised fine-tuning and on-policy distillation (OPD). Across three terminal-based benchmarks, BELIEFWEAVER improves aggregate final score by 5.1 percentage points over native Terminus-2 continuation, with positive trends in exploration efficiency. The distilled 9B student improves final score by 9.8 percentage points over the reported native baseline while reducing estimated teacher API cost by 54.8% relative to the matched teacher. These results show that persistent evidence and prospective reasoning can improve recovery in long-horizon agent tasks while substantially reducing reliance on teacher-model inference.