PreprintCited by 8AI-based Problem Solving and PlanningInformation Retrieval and Search BehaviorWeb Data Mining and Analysis

Tree Search for Language Model Agents

Open access
Koh, Jing Yu, McAleer, Stephen, Fried, Daniel, Salakhutdinov, Ruslan·2024·arXiv

Abstract

Autonomous agents powered by language models (LMs) have demonstrated promise in their ability to perform decision-making tasks such as web automation. However, a key limitation remains: LMs, primarily optimized for natural language understanding and generation, struggle with multi-step reasoning, planning, and using environmental feedback when attempting to solve realistic computer tasks. Towards addressing this, we propose an inference-time search algorithm for LM agents to explicitly perform exploration and multi-step planning in interactive web environments. Our approach is a form of best-first tree search that operates within the actual environment space, and is complementary with most existing state-of-the-art agents. It is the first tree search algorithm for LM agents that shows effectiveness on realistic web tasks. On the challenging VisualWebArena benchmark, applying our search algorithm on top of a GPT-4o agent yields a 39.7% relative increase in success rate compared to the same baseline without search, setting a state-of-the-art success rate of 26.4%. On WebArena, search also yields a 28.0% relative improvement over a baseline agent, setting a competitive success rate of 19.2%. Our experiments highlight the effectiveness of search for web agents, and we demonstrate that performance scales with increased test-time compute. We conduct a thorough analysis of our results to highlight improvements from search, limitations, and promising directions for future work. Our code and models are publicly released at https://jykoh.com/search-agents.

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2407.01476

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • R2D2 organizes the agent's accumulated experiences into a coherent and reusable resource that effectively guides future decisions.

    “Instead of simply recalling past states (Agashe et al., 2024) or relying on on-the-fly reasoning (Koh et al., 2024; Zhou et al., 2024a), our approach organizes the agent's accumulated experiences into a coherent and reusable resource that effectively guides future decisions.”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Koh, J. Y., McAleer, S., Fried, D., & Salakhutdinov, R.
Affiliations
Carnegie Mellon University (US)
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2024
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4400337884
Cited by
2
References
0
Citations by year
2024: 2
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI-based Problem Solving and Planning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Information Retrieval and Search Behavior
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Web Data Mining and Analysis
Keywords
tree search, language model agents, best-first search, multi-stage planning, browser automation, GPT-4o, autonomous agents

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