Optimizing generative AI by backpropagating language model feedback
Abstract
Recent breakthroughs in artificial intelligence (AI) are increasingly driven by systems orchestrating multiple large language models (LLMs) and other specialized tools, such as search engines and simulators. So far, these systems are primarily handcrafted by domain experts and tweaked through heuristics rather than being automatically optimized, presenting a substantial challenge to accelerating progress. The development of artificial neural networks faced a similar challenge until backpropagation and automatic differentiation transformed the field by making optimization turnkey. Analogously, here we introduce TextGrad, a versatile framework that performs optimization by backpropagating LLM-generated feedback to improve AI systems. By leveraging natural language feedback to critique and suggest improvements to any part of a system-from prompts to outputs such as molecules or treatment plans-TextGrad enables the automatic optimization of generative AI systems across diverse tasks. We demonstrate TextGrad's generality and effectiveness through studies in solving PhD-level science problems, optimizing plans for radiotherapy treatments, designing molecules with specific properties, coding, and optimizing agentic systems. TextGrad empowers scientists and engineers to easily develop impactful generative AI systems.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
SelectBestCandidate evolves only from the top-scoring candidate, and BeamSearch maintains a pool of top-N candidates but is still prone to local optima.
“At each step, SelectBestCandidate (used by TextGrad Yuksekgonul et al. (2025)) evolves only from the top-scoring candidate. BeamSearch maintains a pool of the top-N candidates (used by APO Pryzant et al. (2023)), but is still prone to local optima.”
From GEPA: Reflective Prompt Evolution Can Outperform Reinforcement Learning (2025) · cites this paper as Yuksekgonul et al. (2025)
Our optimizer is a language model and, like other LLM-based optimizers, can also learn from text feedback.
“Our optimizer is a language model and, like other LLM-based optimizers (Yuksekgonul et al., 2025;Agrawal et al., 2026), can also learn from text feedback.”
From VERSE: Verified Self-Evolving Optimizer for Agent Harnesses (2026) · cites this paper as Yuksekgonul et al., 2025
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 36 · Cited by 85
- Authors
- Yuksekgonul, M., Bianchi, F., Boen, J., Liu, S., Lu, P., Huang, Z., Guestrin, C., & Zou, J.
- Affiliations
- Stanford University (US)
- Chan Zuckerberg Biohub San Francisco (US)
- Corresponding author
- Zou, James
- ORCID
- Venue
- Nature
- Published
- 2025-03-19
- Volume
- 639
- Issue
- 8055
- Pages
- 609-616
- ISSN
- 0028-0836 (ISSN-L)
- 1476-4687
- OpenAlex
- W4408612787
- Cited by
- 85
- References
- 36
- Citations by year
- 2026: 57 · 2025: 28
- FWCI
- 34.38
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- Locations
- Nature (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Artificial Intelligence Applications
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
- Keywords
- large language models, LLM-generated feedback, agentic systems, radiotherapy treatment planning, automated coding, scientific problem solving, automatic differentiation
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review