ArXiv 日报

Long-term memory is essential for language agents operating across extended interactions and evolving tasks. Existing memory-augmented agents mainly focus on storing and retrieving past experience, but the quality of stored memories may degrade over time. In particular, previously distilled insights can become outdated, over-generalized, or harmful under new task contexts, causing memory pollution when repeatedly reused. To address this issue, we study insight-level memory maintenance for long-term language agents and propose a failure-aware memory maintenance framework based on an editable insight graph. Each insight node tracks positive evidence, negative evidence, and an activation state, enabling the agent to distinguish reusable insights from conflicting or invalid ones. We further introduce a utility-aware retrieval mechanism and a graph controller that updates the memory graph after task execution by keeping reliable insights, archiving invalid ones, revising outdated ones, and adding newly discovered reusable insights. Extensive experiments show that our method consistently outperforms representative memory-based agent baselines across different backbone models. Ablation studies further demonstrate that append-only memory is insufficient for long-horizon tasks, while evidence-aware retrieval and graph-level editing improve memory reliability and downstream task performance.

Copying short-term memory (STM) into a slower store can preserve state across a context boundary, but persistence alone does not ensure that the retained state influences subsequent memory access. We test this distinction in a Phasor Memory Network (PMNet) using Consolidator, a shared slot-local operator that transforms routed STM before accumulating it into long-term memory (LTM), without replaying the source tokens. After each consolidation, the KV cache and STM are cleared. The retained LTM can still be read and is also fed into the hierarchical router, thereby conditioning which explicit-memory slots subsequent inputs access. We evaluate this mechanism on a two-segment modulo-10 mapping task in which the second segment updates the mapping at the same memory address. Following a second consolidation and reset, a held-out query must recover the updated mapping from LTM. The backbone and memory interface are frozen, leaving only 12.35K Consolidator parameters trainable (0.041\% of a 29.95M model). Across five paired runs from the same STM-pretraining checkpoint, direct LTM routing raises updated-mapping recall from $44.38\pm1.94\%$ to $87.02\pm1.76\%$ ($+42.64\pm1.10$ percentage points), while immediate STM recall remains 89.90\% in both conditions; both train separate Consolidators and retain the same LTM read paths. Learned consolidation outperforms forced identity accumulation by $21.40\pm1.91$ percentage points without routing and $68.70\pm1.76$ with routing. Thus, on this task, consolidated LTM serves as both retrievable content and an access state that shapes subsequent slot selection.

Persistent AI agents accumulate versioned state across long horizons, but storage retention alone does not identify authoritative state. Without an explicit control plane, unmediated updates by models, tools, and background workers risk stale overwrites, un-audited exposures, and self-authorizing privilege escalation. We argue that agent state governance is an infrastructural activation problem, defining continuity as an unbroken, authorized lineage of accepted branch heads. We present the Continuity Kernel (CK), an activation contract that decouples off-commit candidate evaluation from atomic state activation. Untrusted components propose typed changes against an exact predecessor head or typed absence. A short activation transaction revalidates ownership, pre-state authority, freshness, and effect uniqueness, recording one stable disposition (Commit, Reject, Quarantine, or Defer). Only Commit atomically advances the branch head and installs the complete accepted unit (state, authority, lineage, effects, outcome, and receipt). A bounded executable model verifies the protocol across 2,808,230 reachable states and 5,526,474 state-changing transitions with zero invariant violations.

Gist-based context compression---summarising older conversation history into compact representations---is a common approach in long-horizon language model agents, yet its effect on different types of memory retrieval is poorly understood. We use Salience-Weighted Consolidation (SWC), a biologically-inspired compression framework motivated by sleep-based memory consolidation, as a diagnostic probe to study when gist compression helps and when it hurts. SWC scores conversation history by salience, partitions it into priority tiers, and applies structured gist abstraction to mid-priority content. Evaluating four conditions on all ten LoCoMo conversations---1,935 matched text-only questions in total, 1,501 used in the primary aggregate after excluding Category 5 (adversarial) questions---at temperature 0, we find a consistent task-type interaction: gist compression substantially outperforms truncation on multi-hop reasoning and single-hop factual questions, but temporal questions remain substantially harder under compression, with compressed conditions scoring well below the full-context reference on the conversations where both are evaluated. We trace this failure to a specific mechanism: the gist abstraction prompt preserves relational and event structure while discarding dates and times. A preservation analysis across all ten conversations confirms the mechanism: an approximately 20-fold increase in temporal expression preservation (3.05% to 62.39%) with a one-sentence prompt modification, while named entity and event preservation rates barely change (x1.02 and x1.11), demonstrating that the fix is a precision instrument. The prompt modification recovers +0.314 [0.254, 0.375] judge accuracy on category-2 (temporal) questions in the matched set. Code and results: https://github.com/kyrkewood/sleeping-agent.

As large language models continue to improve, agentic systems are becoming increasingly important, and tools are a key design dimension because they determine how agents access information and take action in their environments. Prior work on agent tooling has primarily focused on expanding what agents can do, but has paid less systematic attention to how those capabilities are organized and exposed to the model. We refer to this latter design dimension as tool architecture. We study tool architecture in coding agents through controlled experiments on repository-level issue fixing, comparing six tool architectures that hold the underlying information and actions similar while varying how they are organized and exposed to the model, across three actors and a total of 11,700 trajectories. Our experiments show that, even when tools provide similar capabilities, tool architecture changes agent behavior: Compared to a basic architecture where the agent has only the bash tool, more structured low-level interfaces improve consistency across repeated attempts by up to 4.7 $\times$; natural-language search broadens repository exploration and increases access to relevant files by more than 11%; and Python CodeAct-style interfaces achieve similar task performance with 41.6% fewer steps and 56.3% lower token usage. By contrast, lightweight text-based cognitive-scaffolding tools, such as tools that let the agent record intermediate reasoning, have limited effect on actor behavior.

Agent skills are the de facto mechanism for extending LLM agents with reusable guidance. A skill can shape the agent's task execution, including planning, tool use, problem-solving, and validation. Prior work reported mixed results of agent skills: some skills improve task success rates, while others have no effect, increase token use and execution time, and even reduce success rates. This paper presents a comprehensive analysis of skill-induced agent failures by attributing task failures and cost regressions to specific loaded skills. We introduce a differential analysis framework that attributes a failure or regression to a skill by comparing a target skill-guided run against a no-skill or semantically matched skill reference run that solves the same task, or solves it more cheaply. We instantiate this framework on SkillsBench and SWE-Skills-Bench, yielding 307 skill-induced failures, including 125 functional failures and 182 efficiency regressions. We also build SkillTriage, a taxonomy-guided attribution tool that normalizes paired cases, extracts differential evidence, and produces triage reports. Our major findings include: (1) Skill induced functional failures are rarely caused by obviously irrelevant skills; instead, seemingly relevant skills often make the agent incorrectly implement or omit task-required implementation elements. (2) Skill-induced efficiency regressions are not explained by prompt length alone. (3) The largest sources within Excessive Procedure are excessive verification and heavy implementation pipelines, contributing 67 and 30 cases, respectively. This shows that skills often turn validation checklists and construction recipes into mandatory work. Based on our findings, we propose research topics and tooling improvements for safer and more cost-aware skill reuse.

Tool-using LLM agents are commonly trained and evaluated in environments where tool calls succeed reliably, yet deployed tools can fail transiently, persistently, or silently. Robust recovery therefore requires more than repeated retries: an agent may need to retry the same path, switch to an alternative, or recognize that no viable path remains. We present BENCH2ROBUST, a framework that converts failure-free tool-use benchmarks into controlled stochastic environments with scenario-controlled solvability, where episodes explicitly require retrying, switching, or stopping after available paths are exhausted. We use BENCH2ROBUST to study two complementary interventions: structured runtime recovery context through Bayesian Tool Memory (BTM), and curriculum-controlled reinforcement learning. Across 7 models from 4 families and two multi-turn benchmark families, tool failures produce a near-universal robustness gap. On held-out Retail tasks, BTM improves robustness by up to 16.8 percentage points without retraining, while RL learns complementary recovery behavior that remains beneficial without inference-time BTM. Combining the two reaches 40.8-45.5% under injection while preserving failure-free performance. These results suggest that robust tool use benefits from combining environment-specific recovery knowledge with learned recovery behavior.

Self-correction is particularly useful when a failure constrains the next repair. Coding agents benefit from this property because compilers, tests, and execution traces turn many failures into typed recovery signals, but broad language-agent tasks often expose only a coarse task failure. This creates a tension for generic recovery playbooks: they broaden the agent's context precisely when the system needs a narrower repair interface, mixing incompatible signals for invalid actions, missing procedures, and strict-format errors. Our insight is that development-set failures can recover part of the missing diagnostic substrate by deciding which recovery interventions are admissible before test-time correction. We propose DARC, a diagnosis-guided recovery harness that profiles task-family failure modes, prunes mismatched interventions from a shared recovery library, and freezes a verifier-selected success-cost policy for deployment. This causal order makes correction selective: the harness first determines what kind of failure can be repaired, then decides how much recovery evidence to spend. In ALFWorld, AppWorld, and XBRL Finance, the same protocol yields an action-validity harness, a procedural-recovery fallback, and a format-precision retrieval policy; in each evaluated setting it improves average task performance over base agents and broad playbooks while reducing environment steps or retrieval budget. Our experiments show that failures need not trigger uniformly more context: DARC turns self-correction from prompt expansion into recovery-interface design. DARC provides a practical route toward more reliable agents in domains where compiler-like feedback is absent: making failures actionable before making contexts larger.

Achieving effective self-correction, where models verify and correct their own mistakes, remains a fundamental challenge for large language models (LLMs). In this work, we propose Self-Fix Step-DPO (SFS-DPO), a reinforcement learning based, two-stage framework for step-level self-verification and self-correction. The first stage strengthens step-level reasoning via step-level preference optimization, while the second stage explicitly trains models to self-verify and self-correct. We further introduce a teacher-assisted variant, SFS-DPO-R, which incorporates explanatory rationales for error verification to provide stronger corrective signals. Comprehensive in-domain and out-of-domain evaluations across multiple LLMs demonstrate that SFS-DPO and SFS-DPO-R consistently outperform prior step-level training baselines. Our analysis further reveals improvements in self-correction frequency and effectiveness, highlighting the importance of strengthening step-level reasoning for robust performance.

On-policy rollout methods such as GRPO are central to post-training of large language models, yet they frequently suffer from training instabilities, cross-task capability degradation, and response-length inflation. Although prior work has characterized the subspace geometry of aggregate updates, the stepwise variation of this geometry and its relationship to model performance remain unclear. We introduce Principal-Subspace Overlap, a dimension-corrected measure of individual rollout updates relative to the dominant singular subspaces of pretrained weights. Despite low average overlap, transient spikes often precede performance degradation. To address this, we propose GCPO (Geometrically Constrained Policy Optimization), which applies hard bilateral orthogonal projections to constrain updates to the complementary subspaces, preventing such excursions by construction. Across mathematical reasoning, code generation, and tool-use tasks on Qwen3-8B and GLM4-9B, GCPO consistently outperforms GRPO and recent variants, including DAPO and GSPO, improving over the base models and the strongest baseline by up to 27.69 and 2.37 points, respectively. Furthermore, GCPO preserves general capabilities, eliminates response-length inflation, and stabilizes policy entropy. Our findings provide a new diagnostic lens and a principled design perspective for stable reinforcement learning post-training.

Embodied agents are increasingly built as systems around foundation models, where performance depends not only on model weights but also on the skills, context, action interfaces, and execution harness surrounding the model. While supervised fine-tuning and reinforcement learning can adapt agents to new environments, they require additional data, rewards, and training runs; meanwhile, many train-free code-centric approaches rely on programmable robot APIs that may be unavailable in fixed-interface settings. We propose SHAPER, a self-evolving framework for train-free embodied adaptation that keeps model parameters frozen and improves the non-parametric agent system by evolving reusable skills and a context-code harness through target-environment rollouts. In SHAPER, the same frozen model can serve as both planner and optimizer, refining its external skills and context-code harness without parameter updates. We evaluate SHAPER on VLABench and ESI-Bench, covering embodied agents with different low-level action interfaces, and compare against pure execution, supervised fine-tuning, and test-time-scaling baselines such as verifier-free selection and voting. Our results suggest that skill-and-harness optimization is a practical route to self-evolving embodied agents when model training is expensive, unavailable, or undesirable.

World action models (WAMs) condition robot actions on predicted futures, but iterative video rollout increases deployment latency. We ask whether action generation requires the evolving rollout trajectory or only its future representation. Across four WAMs on all 40 LIBERO tasks, paired closed-loop interventions show that masking or reassigning future-cache values changes execution and reduces success, indicating sensitivity to future values and their assigned positions. For Joint and Cosmos-2, however, replaying one fixed final-clean key/value (K/V) cache nearly preserves unmodified execution, with $1.7$ to $1.9$~cm end-effector average displacement error and $97.9\%$ to $98.2\%$ success. This separates cache consumption from production: these models can reuse a fixed cache but still require iterative rollout to construct it. We therefore propose RIFT (\emph{Rollout-free Imagination via Future Tokens}), which uses learned anticipation tokens to construct a complete future K/V cache in one backbone pass while retaining the original future-read interface. On LIBERO, RIFT achieves $98.8\%$ success, close to rollout-based Joint, IDM, and LingBot-VA at $98.4\%$ to $98.6\%$, while reducing action-chunk latency by $68.2\%$ to $89.1\%$. On RoboTwin~2.0, RIFT reaches $92.9/92.6\%$ on clean/randomized scenes, the highest observed among the evaluated methods. These results support rollout-free future conditioning without iterative video generation at deployment.

The prevailing recipe for Vision-Language-Action (VLA) models couples a pretrained VLM with a separately trained flow-matching action expert. This makes the VLM a context encoder rather than a decision-maker. We introduce G0.5, a pretrained autoregressive VLA in which a single transformer decoder emits reasoning and action tokens under a single objective. Three components make this tractable at foundation-model scale: a learnable cross-embodiment action tokenizer that maps heterogeneous robot actions into a shared vocabulary; a native chain-of-thought stream interleaving task decomposition, object grounding, and action hints with action tokens; and a visual memory module that injects multi-second history through the vision encoder. Because reasoning and action share a single set of weights, the pretrained VLM's capabilities carry over to physical behavior: the model follows instructions closely, and prompts directly steer action granularity, task horizon, and out-of-distribution scene handling without further training. Pretrained on a large collection of robot datasets together with VQA samples, G0.5 surpasses state-of-the-art models across 7 independent regimes: real-world fine-tuning on R1lite and R1pro robots (76.7\% vs.\ 53.3\% for $\pi_{0.5}$ and 24.4\% for GR00T-N1.7), the 2025 BEHAVIOR Challenge on 50 long-horizon household mobile manipulation tasks using a generalist policy (31.4\% vs.\ 26.3\% for $\pi_{0.5}$ and 26.1\% for the challenge winner), DROID post-training followed by zero-shot transfer to an unseen environment and objects (82.5\%), a language-following Pick-and-Place benchmark, LIBERO (98.9\%), RoboTwin 2.0 (93.3\%), and SimplerEnv-Bridge (87.3\%).

Heterogeneous multi-agent LLM systems, where agents are powered by different model families, can outperform homogeneous configurations by reducing redundant reasoning patterns. Yet existing communication protocols either operate through text, discarding the sender's internal representations, or require architectural homogeneity for latent-level transfer. We identify the entity grounding problem in cross-architecture communication: cross-attention bridges that transfer continuous representations across different LLM families suffer from rare-token compression collapse, where entity identity is lost in the continuous bottleneck (bridge-only F1 ~30%). We propose XBRIDGE, a decode-free communication protocol that addresses this through two mechanisms. Lexical Anchor Mapping (LAM) maps the sender's original context tokens to the receiver's vocabulary, providing discrete entity anchors. A Latent Enrichment Bridge (LEB) lets the receiver query the sender's hidden states for contextual enrichment. The entity anchors ground the bridge's contextual signals to specific entities through the receiver's own self-attention. Across three model families (Llama, Qwen, and Mistral), seven benchmarks, and both communication directions, XBRIDGE outperforms text-based communication on all seven tasks for each model pair while achieving 11x lower latency, and in a same-architecture setting it also exceeds a KV-sharing baseline on six of seven tasks. LEB requires only 264M trainable parameters (3.8% of the receiver), is trained on a small balanced sample set, and adds negligible inference overhead.

Recent work on distillation transfers the capabilities of large models to smaller ones often by updating the latter's parameters, through teacher forcing, on-policy distillation, and related training-time methods. In this paper, we ask whether such transfer can instead occur at test time. We study strong-to-weak scaffolding: whether a stronger builder model can construct inference-time harnesses that help a weaker target model solve tasks more reliably without any parameter updates. Using four representative Theory-of-Mind benchmarks, each builder model uses 5% of the data as a validation set to iteratively refine its harness over multiple rounds, after which the finalized harness is evaluated on the full test set. Empirically, this form of test-time capability transfer is highly effective, nearly doubling average target-model performance from 0.49 to 0.91. Our analysis shows that the gains come primarily from offloading unstable model reasoning into deterministic code, benchmark-specific routing, and strict answer-format enforcement, rather than from encouraging the target model to reason more extensively or sample more broadly. We further find that builder-model reasoning effort improves harness quality monotonically, platform effects are modest relative to the builder model's own capability, and weaker target models receive the largest gains. These results suggest that inference-time harness design is an important complement to conventional training-time distillation, enabling strong models to transfer cognitive structure to weaker models without retraining.

We present a formal process to enable non-experts to instantiate and iterate on human-aligned reward functions, i.e. reward functions that adhere to a given preference ordering over trajectories. Given a task described in natural language, our process produces a linear reward function in three steps: distill the task's objectives into a set of fundamental objectives and derive measurable outcome variables that capture those fundamental objectives, select a causally representative subset of outcome variables as the reward terms, and fit weights to those reward terms via preference elicitation. Our contributions describe the first step and formalize the latter two steps. The first is a guided workflow for deriving outcome variables. The second is a reduction of reward term selection to minimum-cost partial cover on a causal DAG, solved in polynomial time via max-flow. The third is a geometric framing of weight fitting as a convex feasibility problem iteratively narrowed by preference queries, solved by existing separation oracle methods. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first reward-design method that maintains a deterministically conflict-free feasible weight region, narrowed to a desired tolerance via a separation oracle with O(n log \kappa) preference queries.