Where Should Learning Live? Regret Analysis for Text, Parameter, and Joint Adaptation

Self-evolving language models train on tasks they generate, so every round must decide which updated model the next round inherits. Current loops such as R-Zero, Agent0, and Skill Self-Play make this decision through the task, admitting tasks that look learnable and inheriting every resulting update. We identify a selection-to-update gap in these loops, where a task that looks learnable need not produce a useful update. Most updates on verified tasks fail to make correct answers more likely, yet these loops inherit them all. HeirCommit freezes the updated model and uses fresh evaluation questions to decide whether to inherit it or retain the current model. EvoHeir separates parameter inheritance from experience inheritance, using current and archived experience to repair failures and preserve successes before final confirmation. Our analysis characterizes selection-induced optimism and decomposes regret into selection, absorption, and confirmation errors. HeirCommit cuts the harmful share of accepted updates by 68-83% relative to random inheritance at the same acceptance rate. Across four backbones, EvoHeir achieves the best mathematics and general-reasoning averages, raising the math average by 5.3% relative to the strongest baseline, Agent0. The framework lets useful experience persist even when the model that produced it is not inherited.

A useful language model should know when to answer and when to say "I don't know." Can we improve that decision by training the model itself or by training a separate component to check its answers? We study both approaches on Qwen3-14B for factual questions, using a score that rewards correct answers, penalizes mistakes, and allows abstention. Across three training seeds and two held-out confidence thresholds, a learned answer selector improves threshold-averaged utility over the original model's calibrated confidence filter. On TriviaQA, mean coverage increases from 20.2% to 30.9%, while the pooled error rate among scored answers decreases from 23.0% to 14.5% under exact-match grading. The tested reinforcement-learning changes do not establish consistent gains. On NQ-Open, the selector improves threshold-averaged utility over the filter but still performs worse than always abstaining. A partial human-reviewed audit preserves the TriviaQA finding. Our results support learning to select answers in this setting while showing that reliable abstention across datasets remains unresolved.

Recent language models achieve strong performance across a variety of tasks, but conventional adaptation applies updates uniformly across training samples regardless of their local update benefit. We propose PARALLEL, a prefrontal-aligned reinforcement inspired approach for language-model learning. Inspired by the complementary roles of goal-related and uncertainty-related control, PARALLEL represents these forms of information as separate controller signals and combines them with the current model representation. A reinforcement-inspired controller assigns sample-dependent update intensity using immediate utility-cost feedback. PARALLEL therefore learns when and how strongly to adapt to each sample, prioritizing beneficial updates while limiting unnecessary parameter changes. PARALLEL uses available updates more efficiently than selective baselines while retaining 94.1--99.2% of Full-adaptation performance. Beyond multiple-choice reasoning, experiments on XSum and CNN/DailyMail show that PARALLEL retains 96.9--98.6% of the ROUGE-1 and ROUGE-2 scores achieved by Full adaptation and 98.8--98.9% of the corresponding ROUGE-L scores. When compared at the same cumulative adaptation time or GPU energy, PARALLEL achieves higher ARC accuracy and exhibits a more stable late-stage adaptation trajectory than Full adaptation in the representative run. These results show that learning when and how strongly to update each sample supports stable and efficient post-deployment stream adaptation while avoiding unnecessary updates.