Organizations: Fudan University · The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology · Georgia Institute of Technology · Nanjing University · Shanghai Artificial Intelligence Laboratory · Shanghai Innovation Institute
Recursive self-improvement (RSI) envisions agent systems that autonomously improve their own models and harnesses, with each updated system continuing to improve itself. Existing approaches typically restrict optimization objectives, editable components, or evaluation procedures, limiting open-ended exploration and continuity across generations. We introduce RSI-Env, a persistent environment for coordinated model-harness improvement, supporting autonomous training, harness modification, and retention of research state. An independent Host Controller manages services, evaluation, and versioning. Under Self, each accepted model-harness version takes over the next improvement round. We define three settings that vary goal specificity and access to benchmark feedback: Open-General, Capability-Directed, and Benchmark-Guided. Across these three settings, we compare Self with two fixed external Teachers on seven tasks, starting from Qwen3.8-27B with a minimal harness. Without benchmark feedback, Open-General Self raises GPQA Diamond accuracy from 65.2% to 73.2% and AIME 2026 accuracy from 53.3% to 56.7%. All three Capability-Directed Self runs achieve target-aligned gains. Knowledge Self demonstrates continued improvement across system updates, with SimpleQA accuracy rising from 82.0% to 85.0% and then 88.0%. Benchmark guidance and Teacher benefits vary by task. These results demonstrate RSI-Env's support for open-ended exploration and sustained recursive improvement within the studied runs, while highlighting challenges in preserving gains across capabilities.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: RSI-Env architecture. The RSI Environment supports autonomous open-ended exploration in a sandbox and retains working results. The Host Controller provides services through controlled interfaces and maintains private evaluation data and version management.
Figure 2: Three task settings for assessing progress toward RSI, varying goal specificity and the availability of evaluation feedback. Increasing external guidance reduces the problem-formulation responsibilities assigned to the agent.
GPQA Diamond
AIME 2026
Terminal-Bench 2.1
SimpleQA
Improvement process
Task
Improver
avg@3 (%)
Δ
avg@3 (%)
Δ
pass@3 (%)
Δ
avg@3 (%)
Δ
Final version (H/M)
Tool calls (total)
Total time (h)
base
seed
65.2
–
53.3
–
12.4 (2.2)
–
82.0
–
H0/M0
n/a
n/a
Open-General
General
Self
73.2
↑8.0
56.7
↑3.3
9.0 (2.2)
↓3.4
77.2
↓4.8
H1/M0
454
28.95
GPT-5.6 Sol
60.6
↓4.6
36.7
↓16.6
9.0 (1.1)
↓3.4
81.0
↓1.0
H10/M0
205
1.27
GPT-6 Astra
70.7
↑5.6
60.0
↑6.7
11.2 (3.4)
↓1.1
79.8
↓2.2
H4/M0
902
6.97
Table 1: Self and Teacher results across Open-General and Capability-Directed settings. Light blue cells mark target-aligned benchmarks.
Figure 3: Benchmark-Guided results. Gray bars show the initial system; colored labels show score changes from that system.
Figure 4: Knowledge Self: (a) SimpleQA avg@3 across checkpoints; (b) composition and quality audit of the 48 training examples.
Appendix figures & tables1 asset
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Parameter
Value
Default improvement budget
Allocated iterations per run
10
Maximum duration per iteration
3 hours (early completion allowed)
Total allocated time per run
30 hours
Evaluation settings
Trials per item
3
Appendix
Table 2: Improvement budget and evaluation settings.
Environments are the foundation of recursive self-improvement: they provide the problems agents work on and the feedback used to evaluate progress. Yet constructing challenging research environments with reliable evaluation still depends on domain experts, limiting their scale and disciplinary coverage. We introduce RSI-Forge, a multi-agent pipeline that turns published papers into executable environments for self-improvement. Three agents coordinate construction, reproduction, and review to produce tasks with automated evaluators; each paper's method is independently reimplemented to establish a baseline score. We present 210 environments across 18 fields, including 90 reviewed by independent human domain experts. Both experts and agent judges give high ratings to the potential for improving the provided starting solutions and the evaluators' ability to distinguish solution quality, whereas experts are more critical of shortcut resistance, faithfulness to the source paper, and whether a single idea can exhaust a task. To validate their use for repeated improvement, we evaluate four models over 3 successive attempts on 120 environments, with each attempt inheriting prior code and notes while model weights remain fixed. At least one model improves after the first attempt in 84% of environments. Models also outperform the reproduced paper methods in 68 of the 120 environments, demonstrating room for gains beyond these baselines. Transcript analysis identifies work beyond parameter tuning in 95% of these successful attempts. Analysis of the resulting trajectories shows that models scoring lower on these tasks explore less, more often accept gains smaller than the reported standard error, and rely more heavily on tuning to the development set. RSI-Forge provides a scalable approach to constructing research environments for training and evaluating self-improving agents.
Renxiong Wang, Darvin Yi, Abril Herrlein +16
Scale AI · University of California, Santa Cruz · University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Digital agents must often adapt to new environments whose interfaces, tools, and failure modes are not fully captured by pretrained models. We introduce RSIAgent, a training-free multi-agent framework for recursive self-improvement through autonomous memory construction. RSIAgent coordinates curriculum, actor, and verifier agents to continually explore the environment, validate outcomes, and retain environment-specific knowledge, including reusable causal relationships between actions, conditions, and consequences. It further adopts a broad-then-deep exploration strategy, combining parallel broad recursive self-exploration for discovering diverse environment structures with focused deep self-exploration for uncovering hard cases, hidden constraints, boundary conditions, and previously unknown causal dependencies. The resulting memory is frozen and can be directly reused for downstream tasks without updating model parameters. Experiments on OSWorld-v2 and Agent's Last Exam show that RSIAgent substantially improves strong open-source models, enabling Kimi-K3 and GLM-5.3 to outperform frontier closed-source models including GPT-6.
Sibo Zhu, Shicheng Fan, Xinyue Wang +3
Aether AI · University of California San Diego · ‡Work done during internship in Aether AI +1
Recursive self-improvement (RSI) seeks to enable AI systems to participate in improving their own capabilities. A concrete pathway is autonomous model development, where agents iteratively explore post-training strategies to improve a base model. This setting faces two challenges: agents may exploit open-ended experimental actions through hacking, and repeated experimentation may lead to strategy lock-in, where an early direction is refined rather than reconsidered. We introduce RSI-Master, which addresses the two challenges at two levels: regularize step-wise actions, avoiding hacking behaviors, and promote well-structured exploration of research directions, avoiding strategy lock-in. RSI-Master consists of an Experiment OS, which enables regularized experimental actions and maintains persistent, traceable experimental records, and Reviewer-Guided Research Orchestration, which organizes Workers and Reviewers in a dynamically growing research DAG. Workers explore diverse research directions and Reviewers compare evidence across related experiments for subsequent explorations. On PostTrainBench with Qwen3-4B-Base, it averages 54.49 versus 46.53 for the strongest agent baseline, with a 0.0% hacking rate. Scaling to 35B model, RSI-Master surpasses the human-developed Instruct model on LiveCodeBench-v6 (41.21 vs. 37.36) and SciCode, and reaches a nonzero score on HorizonMath, a benchmark of unsolved research problems on which most frontier models score near zero.
Yaxin Du, Xiyuan Yang, Zhifan Zhou +10
Shanghai Jiao Tong University · Carnegie Mellon University · University of Waterloo