PreprintCited by 2Artificial Intelligence in GamesAI-based Problem Solving and PlanningArtificial Intelligence Applications

Agents of Change: Self-Evolving LLM Agents for Strategic Planning

Open access
Belle, Nikolas, Barnes, Dakota, Amayuelas, Alfonso, Bercovich, Ivan, Wang, Xin Eric, Wang, William·2025·arXiv

Abstract

We address the long-horizon gap in large language model (LLM) agents by enabling them to sustain coherent strategies in adversarial, stochastic environments. Settlers of Catan provides a challenging benchmark: success depends on balancing short- and long-term goals amid randomness, trading, expansion, and blocking. Prompt-centric LLM agents (e.g., ReAct, Reflexion) must re-interpret large, evolving game states each turn, quickly saturating context windows and losing strategic consistency. We propose HexMachina, a continual learning multi-agent system that separates environment discovery (inducing an adapter layer without documentation) from strategy improvement (evolving a compiled player through code refinement and simulation). This design preserves executable artifacts, allowing the LLM to focus on high-level strategy rather than per-turn reasoning. In controlled Catanatron experiments, HexMachina learns from scratch and evolves players that outperform the strongest human-crafted baseline (AlphaBeta), achieving a 54% win rate and surpassing prompt-driven and no-discovery baselines. Ablations confirm that isolating pure strategy learning improves performance. Overall, artifact-centric continual learning transforms LLMs from brittle stepwise deciders into stable strategy designers, advancing long-horizon autonomy.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2506.04651

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Current cross-domain adaptation methods frequently rely on domain-specific fine-tuning, restricting agents' adaptability to new environments without retraining.

    “Current methods frequently rely on domain-specific fine-tuning, restricting agents' adaptability to new environments without retraining (Belle et al., 2025).”

    From A Survey of Self-Evolving Agents: What, When, How, and Where to Evolve on the Path to Artificial Super Intelligence (2025) · cites this paper as Belle et al., 2025

    The Self-Improvement and Policy Evolution section discusses agents that improve without gradient-based training, but does not say that current methods frequently rely on domain-specific fine-tuning. The Limitations section says this paper's framework has not been tested beyond Settlers of Catan; it does not attribute a need for retraining in new environments to other methods. Searches for domain-specific fine-tuning and cross-domain adaptability found no passage establishing the claim. (LLM, conf=0.73)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Still being checked.

Research works printed but not linked: 16

  1. Yanan Chen, Ali Pesaranghader, Tanmana Sadhu, and Dong Hoon Yi. Can we rely on llm agents to draft long-horizon plans? let's take travelplanner as an example. arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.06318, 2024. · arXiv
  2. Anthony Costarelli, Mat Allen, Roman Hauksson, Grace Sodunke, Suhas Hariharan, Carlson Cheng, Wenjie Li, Joshua Clymer, and Arjun Yadav. Gamebench: Evaluating strategic reasoning abilities of llm agents. arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.06613, 2024. · arXiv
  3. Xiangjue Dong, Maria Teleki, and James Caverlee. A survey on llm inference-time self- improvement. arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.14352, 2024. · arXiv
  4. Meta Fundamental AI Research Diplomacy Team (FAIR) †, Anton Bakhtin, Noam Brown, Emily Dinan, Gabriele Farina, Colin Flaherty, Daniel Fried, Andrew Goff, Jonathan Gray, Hengyuan Hu, et al. Human-level play in the game of diplomacy by combining language models with strategic reasoning. Science, 378(6624):1067-1074, 2022.
  5. Chrisantha Fernando, Dylan Banarse, Henryk Michalewski, Simon Osindero, and Tim Rock- täschel. Promptbreeder: Self-referential self-improvement via prompt evolution. arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.16797, 2023. · arXiv
  6. Roberto Gallotta, Graham Todd, Marvin Zammit, Sam Earle, Antonios Liapis, Julian Togelius, and Georgios N Yannakakis. Large language models and games: A survey and roadmap. IEEE Transactions on Games, 2024.
  7. Quentin Gendre and Tomoyuki Kaneko. Playing catan with cross-dimensional neural network. In Neural Information Processing: 27th International Conference, ICONIP 2020, Bangkok, Thailand, November 23-27, 2020, Proceedings, Part II 27, pages 580-592. Springer, 2020.
  8. Muhammad Umair Nasir, Steven James, and Julian Togelius. Gametraversalbenchmark: Eval- uating planning abilities of large language models through traversing 2d game maps. arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.07765, 2024. · arXiv
  9. Siyuan Qi, Shuo Chen, Yexin Li, Xiangyu Kong, Junqi Wang, Bangcheng Yang, Pring Wong, Yifan Zhong, Xiaoyuan Zhang, Zhaowei Zhang, et al. Civrealm: A learning and reasoning odyssey in civilization for decision-making agents. arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.10568, 2024. · arXiv
  10. John Schultz, Jakub Adamek, Matej Jusup, Marc Lanctot, Michael Kaisers, Sarah Perrin, Daniel Hennes, Jeremy Shar, Cannada Lewis, Anian Ruoss, et al. Mastering board games by external and internal planning with language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.12119, 2024. · arXiv
  11. David Silver, Aja Huang, Chris J. Maddison, Arthur Guez, Laurent Sifre, George van den Driessche, Julian Schrittwieser, Ioannis Antonoglou, Vedavyas Panneershelvam, Marc Lanctot, Sander Dieleman, Dominik Grewe, John Nham, Nal Kalchbrenner, Ilya Sutskever, Timothy P. Lillicrap, Madeleine Leach, Koray Kavukcuoglu, Thore Graepel, and Demis Hassabis. Mas- tering the game of go with deep neural networks and tree search. Nature, 529(7587):484-489, 2016.
  12. Yuda Song, Hanlin Zhang, Carson Eisenach, Sham Kakade, Dean Foster, and Udaya Ghai. Mind the gap: Examining the self-improvement capabilities of large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.02674, 2024. · arXiv
  13. István Szita, Guillaume Chaslot, and Pieter Spronck. Monte-carlo tree search in settlers of catan. In Advances in computer games, pages 21-32. Springer, 2009.
  14. Xinyuan Wang, Chenxi Li, Zhen Wang, Fan Bai, Haotian Luo, Jiayou Zhang, Nebojsa Jojic, Eric P Xing, and Zhiting Hu. Promptagent: Strategic planning with language models enables expert-level prompt optimization. arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.16427, 2023. · arXiv
  15. Zhiheng Xi, Wenxiang Chen, Xin Guo, Wei He, Yiwen Ding, Boyang Hong, Ming Zhang, Junzhe Wang, Senjie Jin, Enyu Zhou, et al. The rise and potential of large language model based agents: A survey. Science China Information Sciences, 68(2):121101, 2025.
  16. Shunyu Yao, Jeffrey Zhao, Dian Yu, Nan Du, Izhak Shafran, Karthik Narasimhan, and Yuan Cao. React: Synergizing reasoning and acting in language models. In International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR), 2023.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Belle, N., Barnes, D., Amayuelas, A., Bercovich, I., Wang, X. E., & Wang, W.
Affiliations
University of California, Santa Barbara (US)
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2025
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4416132639
Cited by
0
References
0
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Artificial Intelligence in Games
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI-based Problem Solving and Planning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Artificial Intelligence Applications
Keywords
LLM agents, long-horizon planning, strategic planning, continual learning, multi-agent systems, program refinement, adversarial environments

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