A Survey of Self-Evolving Agents: What, When, How, and Where to Evolve on the Path to Artificial Super Intelligence

Prompt Optimization enables LLM agents to self-evolve by refining the instructions fed to the backbone model, directly altering the model's behavior without modifying model weights.

“While memory evolution focused on what knowledge an agent retains, Prompt Optimization (PO) enables LLM agents to self-evolve by refining the instructions it feeds to the backbone model, which directly alters the model's behavior without modifying model weights(Ramnath et al., 2025).”

• cites Ramnath et al., 2025 sourcePartly supported

  The Introduction (p. unavailable) says black-box automatic prompt optimization improves task performance through automated prompt improvements, and §3.1 shows prompts being evaluated as inputs to a target model. This supports refining instructions to change model outputs without changing the target model’s weights. The survey does not establish the broader claim that this enables LLM agents to self-evolve. (LLM, conf=0.82)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

SELF, SCoRe, and PAG interpret execution traces or natural-language critiques as reward signals within an online Supervised Fine-Tuning combined with Reinforcement Learning framework, enabling continuous policy improvement.

“SELF(Lu et al., 2023), SCoRe(Kumar et al., 2024), and PAG(Jiang et al., 2025b) interpret execution traces or naturallanguage critiques as reward signals within an online Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT) combined with Reinforcement Learning (RL) framework, enabling continuous policy improvement.”

• cites Lu et al., 2023Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites Kumar et al., 2024 sourcePartly supported

  For SCoRe, the Introduction and §5.2 describe on-policy, multi-turn reinforcement learning with a reward bonus for self-correction progress. They do not describe an online SFT-plus-RL framework or treating execution traces or natural-language critiques as reward signals; §5.2 defines the bonus using changes in response correctness instead. This verdict addresses only SCoRe, the method attributed to Kumar et al. in the citing sentence. (LLM, conf=0.88)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
• cites Jiang et al., 2025bNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

LLM-based agents are increasingly designed with long-term memory mechanisms that grow and adapt as the agent continues to solve tasks and interacts with its environment.

“LLM-based agents are increasingly designed with long-term memory mechanisms that grow and adapt as the agent continues to solve tasks and interacts with its environment(Shan et al., 2025; Qian et al., 2023a).”

• cites Shan et al., 2025 sourceSupported
• cites Qian et al., 2023aNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

STaR and Quiet-STaR focus on reasoning improvement through rationalization: models attempt problems, then generate explanations for correct answers they initially failed to solve, creating augmented training data that combines successful attempts with post-hoc reasoning.

“STaR (Zelikman et al., 2022) and Quiet-STaR (Zelikman et al., 2024) focus on reasoning improvement through rationalization-models attempt problems, then generate explanations for correct answers they initially failed to solve, creating augmented training data that combines successful attempts with post-hoc reasoning.”

• cites Zelikman et al., 2022Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites Zelikman et al., 2024 sourcePartly supported

  Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Acikgoz et al. introduce a Test-Time Self-Improvement (TT-SI) framework that enables agents to adapt on-the-fly by first identifying uncertain test samples through self-awareness.

“Acikgoz et al. (2025) introduce a Test-Time Self-Improvement (TT-SI) framework that enables agents to adapt on-the-fly by first identifying uncertain test samples through self-awareness.”

• cites Acikgoz et al., 2025Supported

Self-adaptive language modeling generates 'self-edits' that can restructure information representations, specify optimization hyperparameters, or invoke tools for data augmentation and gradient computation.

“Self-adaptive language modeling (Zweiger et al., 2025) exemplifies this approach by generating 'self-edits', which are meta-level instructions that can restructure information representations, specify optimization hyperparameters, or invoke tools for data augmentation and gradient computation.”

• cites Zweiger et al., 2025Supported

The implementation of self-evolution across temporal phases leverages three fundamental learning paradigms in LLMs: in-context learning, supervised fine-tuning, and reinforcement learning.

“The implementation of self-evolution across these temporal phases leverages three fundamental learning paradigms in LLMs: in-context learning (ICL) (Dong et al., 2022; Min et al., 2021; Wies et al., 2023), which adapts behavior through contextual examples without modifying parameters; supervised fine-tuning (SFT), which updates model weights through gradient-based optimization on labeled data (Dev”

• cites Dong et al., 2022Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites Min et al., 2021 sourceSupported
• cites Wies et al., 2023 sourceSupported

In self-adaptive language modeling, self-edits trigger immediate supervised fine-tuning, resulting in persistent weight updates that adapt the model to the current task.

“These self-edits trigger immediate supervised fine-tuning, resulting in persistent weight updates that adapt the model to the current task.”

• cites Zweiger et al., 2025Supported

The key innovation of self-adaptive language modeling lies in a meta-learning phase where reinforcement learning trains models to produce effective self-edits by using the downstream performance of the updated model as the reward signal.

“The key innovation lies in the meta-learning phase, where reinforcement learning trains models to produce effective self-edits by using the downstream performance of the updated model as the reward signal, essentially teaching models how to teach themselves.”

• cites Zweiger et al., 2025Supported

AgentEvolver's self-attributing mechanism uses an LLM's reasoning to retrospectively assign step-wise rewards that are dense and semantically grounded for policy optimization.

“In particular, its self-attributing mechanism uses an LLM's reasoning to retrospectively assign step-wise rewards that are dense and semantically grounded for policy optimization.”

• cites Zhai et al., 2025 sourceSupported

Deng et al. (2024) demonstrates how vision-language models can improve iteratively by training on their own generated image descriptions and visual reasoning chains.

“Deng et al. (2024) demonstrates how vision-language models can improve iteratively by training on their own generated image descriptions and visual reasoning chains.”

• cites Deng et al., 2024 sourcePartly supported

  Section 4 (p. 5) describes a two-stage method in which the model learns from its own image descriptions, and the Abstract (p. 1) reports performance gains. But the paper says the reasoning stage reuses existing instruction-tuning data with self-generated descriptions appended to the prompts; it does not say the model trains on its own generated visual reasoning chains or demonstrate repeated iterative improvement. (LLM, conf=0.87)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

AlphaZero achieved superior performance in complex games by learning entirely without human data.

“Its principles were famously demonstrated by systems like AlphaZero (Silver et al., 2017), which achieved superior performance in complex games by learning entirely without human data.”

• cites Silver et al., 2017 sourceSupported

EvoLLM-JP uses evolutionary algorithms to optimally merge multiple foundation models into a single, specialized model with superior performance.

“EvoLLM-JP (Akiba et al., 2025) takes this further by using evolutionary algorithms to optimally merge multiple foundation models into a single, specialized model with superior performance.”

• cites Akiba et al., 2025 sourceSupported

In recommendation systems, self-optimized fine-tuning enables LLM-based recommender systems to learn from their own successful recommendation patterns, creating a feedback loop that enhances personalization over time.

“In recommendation systems, techniques such as self-optimized fine-tuning (Tang et al., 2025) enable LLM-based recommender systems to learn from their own successful recommendation patterns, creating a feedback loop that enhances personalization over time.”

• cites Tang et al., 2025 sourcePartly supported

  Section 3.1 describes using a fine-tuned LLM’s own outputs to create training data, and Section 3.2 describes adapting the training curriculum to the model’s progress. The paper does not say it selects successful recommendations to learn from or establishes an ongoing feedback loop that improves personalization over time; it reports improved recommendation performance from fine-tuning. (LLM, conf=0.88)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Puppeteer focuses on coordination strategy evolution rather than team composition changes.

“Puppeteer (Dang et al., 2025) takes a different approach by focusing on coordination strategy evolution rather than team composition changes.”

• cites Dang et al., 2025 sourcePartly supported

  Sections 2.1 (Dynamic Orchestration) and 2.2 (Adaptive Evolution) support the emphasis on an evolving coordination policy. But the policy also changes which agents participate: it selects agents at each step and increasingly prunes unhelpful ones. Thus, the contrast with team composition changes is too absolute if it includes the composition of the active team. (LLM, conf=0.83)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Some agents evolve online not by updating their model weights, but by refining their plans and skill libraries on the fly.

“Some agents evolve online not by updating their model weights, but by refining their plans and skill libraries on the fly.”

• cites Wang et al., 2023aNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites Sun et al., 2023 sourceSupported
• cites Lin et al., 2023 sourcePartly supported

  Section 3.3 says SAGE refines its plan on the fly when action history reveals a mistake or unachievable subgoal. The paper describes this as prompting an LLM during interaction, rather than updating weights, but it does not describe refining a skill library. It also reports that the separate SWIFT module was fine-tuned before use. (LLM, conf=0.87)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-Instruct shows how a language model can bootstrap its own instruction-following ability by generating new instructions, paired with its own responses, creating a synthetic dataset for fine-tuning.

“For example, Self-Instruct(Wang et al., 2022) shows how a language model can bootstrap its own instructionfollowing ability by generating new instructions, paired with its own responses, creating a synthetic dataset for fine-tuning.”

• cites Wang et al., 2022 sourceSupported

AdaPlanner adapts its plan within a task by generating an initial plan, receiving feedback from the environment, and refining the plan online.

“AdaPlanner(Sun et al., 2023) focuses on adapting its plan within a task; it generates an initial plan, receives feedback from the environment, and refines the plan online.”

• cites Sun et al., 2023 sourceSupported

Benchmark papers occasionally document aggregate resource consumption during evaluation, but they rarely decompose costs into evolution-specific components.

“While benchmark papers occasionally document aggregate resource consumption during evaluation (Chan et al., 2024), they rarely decompose costs into evolution-specific components: tokens consumed during self-reflection or experience replay, wall-clock time spent on architecture search or memory updates, tool invocations triggered by autonomous exploration.”

• cites Chan et al., 2024 sourceSupported

Training data contamination complicates cross-domain assessment.

“while training data contamination complicates cross-domain assessment (Chan et al., 2024).”

• cites Chan et al., 2024 sourceSupported

Alignment faking rates escalated from 12% to 78% when agents autonomously evolved under conflicting objectives.

“Alignment faking rates escalated from 12% to 78% when agents autonomously evolved under conflicting objectives (Greenblatt et al., 2024), illustrating safety challenges when evolution proceeds with minimal external oversight.”

• cites Greenblatt et al., 2024 sourcePartly supported

  The Figure 2 caption (Introduction; page unavailable) reports alignment-faking reasoning rising from 12% to 78% over reinforcement-learning training of a prompted model. It does not describe agents autonomously evolving with minimal oversight. Section 8.1 also distinguishes the rise in reasoning from alignment-faking behavior, whose absolute rate decreased. (LLM, conf=0.91)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Technological progress reduces the discriminative power of older tasks, as modern agents benefit from algorithmic advances unavailable to earlier systems.

“Technological progress further reduces the discriminative power of older tasks, as modern agents benefit from algorithmic advances unavailable to earlier systems (Chan et al., 2024)”

• cites Chan et al., 2024 sourcePartly supported

  The ‘Coverage of AI R&D capabilities’ passage says algorithmic progress may make older Kaggle competitions easier because today’s agents have knowledge and tools unavailable to the original participants. It frames this as a concern, not an established reduction in the discriminative power of older tasks generally. (LLM, conf=0.86)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Test-time scaling and inference-time adaptation provide promising pathways for enhancing cross-domain generalization.

“Recent advancements in test-time scaling and inference-time adaptation provide promising pathways for enhancing cross-domain generalization (Snell et al., 2024; Zhang et al., 2025l).”

• cites Snell et al., 2024 sourcePartly supported

  The Introduction and Section 6 describe test-time computation and iterative inference-time revisions that can improve LLM responses on reasoning problems. They do not establish that these methods enhance cross-domain generalization; the paper’s analysis focuses on math reasoning rather than transfer across domains. (LLM, conf=0.86)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
• cites Zhang et al., 2025lNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

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).”

• cites Belle et al., 2025 sourceCould not verify

  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

No benchmark combines extended memory assessment with rigorous safety auditing, leaving open whether agents can maintain personalization across thousands of interactions while guaranteeing zero sensitive information leakage.

“Long-horizon retention with privacy constraints : No benchmark combines extended memory assessment (as in LTMBenchmark (Castillo-Bolado et al., 2024)) with rigorous safety auditing (as in AgentSafetyBench (Zhang et al., 2024i)), leaving open whether agents can maintain personalization across thousands of interactions while guaranteeing zero sensitive information leakage.”

• cites Castillo-Bolado et al., 2024 sourceSupported
• cites Zhang et al., 2024iNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Existing personalized agents typically depend heavily on labeled data and post-training methodologies.

“Existing personalized agents typically depend heavily on labeled data and post-training methodologies (Cheng et al., 2024).”

• cites Cheng et al., 2024 sourcePartly supported

  The Method (§4) and Data Construction (§5) describe AUTOPAL’s use of annotated data, supervised fine-tuning, and direct preference optimization. The Personalized Dialogue Agents section describes several existing approaches but does not establish that personalized agents typically depend heavily on labeled data and post-training methods. (LLM, conf=0.78)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

The computational cost of dynamic reasoning in LLM-based agents grows non-linearly with the complexity of adaptation mechanisms, imposing practical constraints on achievable generalization within realistic resource limitations.

“Additionally, the computational cost associated with dynamic reasoning in LLM-based agents grows non-linearly with the complexity of adaptation mechanisms, imposing practical constraints on achievable generalization within realistic resource limitations (Kim et al., 2025).”

• cites Kim et al., 2025 sourcePartly supported

  The Introduction (p. 1) says dynamic reasoning can raise per-request costs by orders of magnitude, and the Test-Time Scaling analysis (pp. 9–10) reports substantial overhead and diminishing accuracy returns as reasoning paths or reflection steps increase. The paper supports practical resource constraints on deploying agents, but it does not establish a general non-linear relationship between cost and the complexity of adaptation mechanisms or directly measure a limit on achievable generalization. (LLM, conf=0.84)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-evolving agents equipped with reflective and memory-augmented capabilities show substantial promise for enhancing generalization, particularly in smaller, resource-constrained models.

“Recent studies indicate that selfevolving agents equipped with reflective and memory-augmented capabilities show substantial promise for enhancing generalization, particularly in smaller, resource-constrained models (Liang et al., 2024).”

• cites Liang et al., 2024 sourceSupported

Self-training on agent-generated data can lead to catastrophic forgetting of safety alignment, causing agents to execute harmful instructions they previously refused.

“For instance, self-training on agent-generated data can lead to”

• cites Shao et al., 2025 sourceSupported
• cites Hahm et al., 2025 sourcePartly supported

  Section 2.2 and the Conclusion report that fine-tuning on benign agentic datasets reduced refusals and increased completion of harmful tasks. The copy describes supervised fine-tuning on specified datasets (Section 4.1); it does not establish that the models were self-trained on their own generated data or identify catastrophic forgetting as the mechanism. (LLM, conf=0.87)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Meta-learning strategies have demonstrated considerable potential in facilitating rapid few-shot adaptation to new domains.

“Additionally, meta-learning strategies have demonstrated considerable potential in facilitating rapid few-shot adaptation to new domains (Bilal et al., 2025).”

• cites Bilal et al., 2025 sourceSupported

Misevolution can occur during model evolution.

“A phenomenon termed”

• cites Shao et al., 2025 sourceSupported

Risks from self-evolving agents are fundamentally tied to the agent's capacity for autonomous self-modification and adaptation.

“These risks are not merely extensions of traditional AI safety issues, such as those arising from vague user instructions or environmental threats like malicious phishing links (Zhou et al., 2025d), but are fundamentally tied to the agent's capacity for autonomous self-modification and adaptation (Shao et al., 2025; Han et al., 2025).”

• cites Shao et al., 2025 sourceSupported
• cites Han et al., 2025 sourceSupported

An agent's goals and values may drift away from original human intent as it evolves, exacerbated by learning uncertainty inherent in self-evolution, especially when operating in ambiguous contexts.

“A core risk is that an agent's goals and values may drift away from original human intent as it evolves. This is exacerbated by the learning uncertainty inherent in self-evolution, especially when operating in ambiguous contexts (Anwar et al., 2024; Bagdasarian et al., 2024).”

• cites Anwar et al., 2024 sourcePartly supported

  Section 2.5.1 says lifelong learning can change an LLM-agent’s behavior, lead it to pursue misaligned goals, and potentially undo its alignment. Section 2.5.2 discusses underspecified goals and risky actions under uncertainty, but the copy does not say that uncertainty inherent in self-evolution exacerbates goal drift specifically in ambiguous contexts. Page numbers were not available in the indexed passages. (LLM, conf=0.84)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
• cites Bagdasarian et al., 2024 sourcePartly supported

  Section 3.2 (page unavailable) describes context hijacking: an adversary can alter the apparent context and induce an agent to share information contrary to the user's privacy expectations. This supports a risk of context-dependent deviation, but the paper does not attribute it to evolving goals or values, self-evolution, or learning uncertainty. (LLM, conf=0.83)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Catastrophic forgetting of continual memorization is inherent in LLMs.

“Self-evolving agents must continuously adapt to new tasks while retaining previously acquired knowledge, a challenge exacerbated by the catastrophic forgetting phenomenon (Ghosal et al., 2024) of continual memorization (Chen et al., 2024b) inherent in LLMs (Bell et al., 2025).”

• cites Ghosal et al., 2024 sourcePartly supported

  The Introduction reports that fine-tuning on less well-encoded facts can make a model answer incorrectly to questions it could previously answer. But Theorem 4.2 explains this as stored knowledge being suppressed in the output, not necessarily forgotten; the paper does not establish catastrophic forgetting as inherent in LLMs. In the citing sentence, the references to continual memorization and what is inherent in LLMs are attached to other citations. (LLM, conf=0.83)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
• cites Chen et al., 2024bNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites Bell et al., 2025 sourcePartly supported

  Section 4.1.2 (p. 7) describes catastrophic forgetting as a critical challenge when foundation models are continually updated, and Section 4.2.2 (p. 10) says continual fine-tuning methods experience it. The paper does not specifically identify forgetting of “continual memorization” as inherent in LLMs; the Introduction (p. 2) instead notes their reduced propensity for catastrophic forgetting. (LLM, conf=0.84)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Agents still struggle to differentiate between necessary and irrelevant sensitive information.

“A major challenge here is that agents still struggle to differentiate between necessary and irrelevant sensitive information (Zharmagambetov et al., 2025)”

• cites Zharmagambetov et al., 2025 sourceSupported

Test-time scaling and inference-time adaptation techniques allow agents to dynamically allocate additional reasoning capacity to unfamiliar scenarios by scaling computational resources during inference, avoiding the need for increasing model parameters.

“These techniques allow agents to dynamically allocate additional reasoning capacity to unfamiliar scenarios by scaling computational resources during inference, avoiding the need for increasing model parameters.”

• cites Snell et al., 2024 sourcePartly supported

  Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
• cites Zhang et al., 2025lNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Current evaluations rely on static snapshots: agents are tested once on diverse tasks without tracking whether cross-domain transfer degrades as they evolve over extended learning trajectories.

“Current evaluations, however, rely on static snapshots: agents are tested once on diverse tasks without tracking whether cross-domain transfer degrades as they evolve over extended learning trajectories.”

Generalization is typically evaluated through multi-domain test suites and held-out task distributions, measuring an agent's ability to transfer knowledge across domains.

“Generalization is typically evaluated through multi-domain test suites (AgentBench (Liu et al., 2023b), TheAgentCompany (Xu et al., 2024b) and held-out task distributions, measuring an agent's ability to transfer knowledge across domains.”

• cites Liu et al., 2023bNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites Xu et al., 2024bNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Safety evaluation predominantly captures risks in isolated episodes.

“Safety evaluation predominantly captures risks in isolated episodes.”

Efficiency suffers from sparse and inconsistent reporting of evolution costs.

“Efficiency suffers from sparse and inconsistent reporting of evolution costs.”

Highly self-directed systems demonstrate substantial performance gains through autonomous curriculum generation.

“Highly self-directed systems demonstrate substantial performance gains through autonomous curriculum generation.”

The overwhelming majority of existing benchmarks adopt episodic evaluation where agent state resets between tasks.

“the overwhelming majority of existing benchmarks adopt episodic evaluation where agent state resets between tasks”

No benchmark tracks safety trajectories over extended evolution-whether risks accumulate through repeated exposure to edge cases, or whether unsafe behaviors emerge through autonomous exploration and self-directed learning.

“Yet no benchmark tracks safety trajectories over extended evolution-whether risks accumulate through repeated exposure to edge cases, or whether unsafe behaviors emerge through autonomous exploration and self-directed learning.”

Large language models remain fundamentally static and unable to adapt their internal parameters to novel tasks, evolving knowledge domains, or dynamic interaction contexts.

“Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable capabilities across diverse tasks but remain fundamentally static, unable to adapt their internal parameters to novel tasks, evolving knowledge domains, or dynamic interaction contexts.”

• Also stated in: § 1 Introduction · p. 2 · plain

  “Yet, they remain fundamentally static (Luo et al., 2025a), unable to adapt their internal parameters when encountering novel tasks, evolving knowledge domains, or dynamic interaction contexts.”

• cites Luo et al., 2025aNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

As LLMs are increasingly deployed in open-ended, interactive environments, their static nature has become a critical bottleneck.

“As LLMs are increasingly deployed in open-ended, interactive environments, this static nature has become a critical bottleneck, necessitating agents that can adaptively reason, act, and evolve in real time.”

• Also stated in: § 1 Introduction · p. 2 · plain

  “As LLMs are increasingly deployed in open-ended, interactive environments, this limitation becomes a critical bottleneck.”

In complex systems, an agent often orchestrates a sequence of LLM calls or collaborates with other agents, making prompt design a multi-node problem.

“In complex systems, an agent often orchestrates a sequence of LLM calls or collaborates with other agents, making prompt design a multi-node problem.”

TextGrad treats unstructured textual feedback as a differentiable training signal capable of directly influencing both prompt design and model parameters.

“TextGrad(Yellamraju et al., 2024) further extends this concept by treating unstructured textual feedback as a differentiable training signal capable of directly influencing both prompt design and model parameters.”

• cites Yellamraju et al., 2024Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Recent studies emphasize enabling agents to autonomously generate data to improve their own model weights.

“Consequently, recent studies emphasize enabling agents to autonomously generate data to improve their own model weights.”

These approaches extend prompt optimization from a single instruction to the language that defines whole workflows or societies of agents.

“These approaches extend PO from a single instruction to the language that defines whole workflows or societies of agents.”

A key challenge for all search and learning methods is the computational cost of evaluating each potential workflow.

“A key challenge for all search and learning methods is the computational cost of evaluating each potential workflow (Shang et al., 2025).”

• cites Shang et al., 2025Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

A critical aspect of memory evolution is enabling agents to learn heuristics or skills from past experiences.

“A critical aspect of memory evolution is enabling agents to learn heuristics or skills from past experiences.”

Together, optimizing the agent's architectural blueprint and its functional code demonstrates a key trend toward turning the agent's fundamental structure and logic into learnable components.

“Together, these two directions (optimizing the agent's architectural 'blueprint' and its functional code) demonstrate a key trend toward turning the agent's fundamental structure and logic into learnable components.”

Collectively, these techniques demonstrate that an agent can autonomously improve its prompting policy, turning prompt text into a learnable component that co-evolves with the agent's experience.

“Collectively, these techniques demonstrate that an agent can autonomously improve its prompting policy, turning prompt text into a learnable component that co-evolves with the agent's experience.”

Advanced agents distill experiences into more general guidance rather than only retrieving exact past instances.

“Rather than only retrieving exact past instances, advanced agents distill experiences into more general guidance(Zhao et al., 2024a; Fu et al., 2024).”

• cites Zhao et al., 2024aNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites Fu et al., 2024Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

The Self-Challenging Agent fine-tunes its parameters using trajectories derived from successful solutions, resulting in significant performance gains on complex, multi-step tasks.

“The model then fine-tunes its parameters using trajectories derived from successful solutions, resulting in significant performance gains on complex, multi-step tasks.”

• cites Zhou et al., 2025eNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Optimizing a single LLM call within an agentic system is a difficult credit assignment problem, because the effect of any single change is obscured by subsequent steps.

“Optimizing a single LLM call is straightforward in isolation, but within an agentic system, it becomes a difficult credit assignment problem, as the effect of any single change is obscured by subsequent steps.”

• AssumptionRests on an assumption: Optimizing a single LLM call within an agentic system is a difficult credit assignment problem.

Dynamic interaction loops point toward autonomous, open-ended improvement cycles deeply grounded in experiential adaptation.

“Such dynamic interaction loops point toward autonomous, open-ended improvement cycles deeply grounded in experiential adaptation.”

There is no systematic survey devoted to a dedicated, comprehensive investigation of self-evolving agents as a first-class research paradigm.

“Therefore, there is no systematic survey devoted to a dedicated, comprehensive investigation of self-evolving agents as a first-class research paradigm.”

ICRL methods exploit the hypothesis that pre-trained neural networks can implement implicit reinforcement learning algorithms within their forward pass, processing contextual information to adapt behavior without parameter updates.

“These methods exploit the hypothesis that pre-trained neural networks can implement implicit reinforcement learning algorithms within their forward pass, processing contextual information to adapt behavior without parameter updates (Kirsch et al., 2023).”

• cites Kirsch et al., 2023Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

These inter-test-time RL approaches exploit the pre-deployment phase to engage in extensive trial-and-error learning, developing robust policies through thousands of interactions that would be impractical during real-time deployment.

“These approaches exploit the pre-deployment phase to engage in extensive trial-and-error learning, developing robust policies through thousands of interactions that would be impractical during real-time deployment.”

Inter-test-time SFT methods establish a paradigm of iterative self-improvement through synthetic data generation and self-evaluation.

“Inter-test-time SFT (Chen et al., 2025b) methods establish a paradigm of iterative self-improvement through synthetic data generation and self-evaluation.”

• cites Chen et al., 2025bNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Collectively, these studies underscore multi-agent reinforcement learning as a promising route for cultivating group-level competencies unattainable by individual agents alone.

“Collectively, these studies underscore multi-agent reinforcement learning as a promising route for cultivating group-level competencies unattainable by individual agents alone.”

Intra-test-time RL enables models to develop new capabilities on-demand when encountering problems beyond their current competence.

“Intra-test-time RL enables models to develop new capabilities on-demand when encountering problems beyond their current competence.”

Co-evolving multiple autonomous agents' internal behavioral policies through interaction enables emergent capabilities like coordination, task delegation, and beneficial competition.

“This approach enables emergent capabilities like coordination, task delegation, and beneficial competition.”

ARIA extends the inter-test-time SFT paradigm by incorporating human-in-the-loop guidance into test-time adaptation, allowing agents to proactively identify knowledge gaps and request expert feedback.

“Recent frameworks such as ARIA (He et al., 2025a) further extend this paradigm by incorporating human-in-the-loop guidance into test-time adaptation, allowing agents to proactively identify knowledge gaps and request expert feedback.”

• cites He et al., 2025aNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

These inter-test-time SFT methods share a core insight: models can bootstrap their own improvement by learning to evaluate and enhance their outputs, creating high-quality training signals from initially imperfect attempts without extensive human supervision.

“These methods share a core insight: models can bootstrap their own improvement by learning to evaluate and enhance their outputs, creating high-quality training signals from initially imperfect attempts without extensive human supervision.”

Inter-test-time RL leverages unconstrained computational resources to optimize agents through extensive environmental interaction and sophisticated curriculum design.

“Inter-test-time RL leverages unconstrained computational resources to optimize agents through extensive environmental interaction and sophisticated curriculum design.”

LADDER's approach transforms insurmountable challenges into learning opportunities, allowing models to expand their problem-solving repertoire during deployment rather than failing or providing suboptimal solutions.

“This approach transforms insurmountable challenges into learning opportunities, allowing models to expand their problem-solving repertoire during deployment rather than failing or providing suboptimal solutions.”

Inter-test-time self-evolution represents the predominant learning process in autonomous agents, wherein adaptation occurs following task execution rather than during it.

“Inter-test-time self-evolution represents the predominant learning process in autonomous agents, wherein adaptation occurs following task execution rather than during it.”

WebRL develops web navigation agents through self-evolving curricula that automatically adjust task complexity based on performance.

“WebRL (Qi et al., 2024) develops web navigation agents through self-evolving curricula that automatically adjust task complexity based on performance”

• cites Qi et al., 2024Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

The confidence-based reward paradigm leverages the model's intrinsic understanding to guide improvement without relying on external supervision.

“This paradigm leverages the model's intrinsic understanding to guide improvement without relying on external supervision.”

Implicit reward methods offer unique advantages over rule-based or environment-derived external rewards by discovering and utilizing reward signals inherently present in language modeling.

“Unlike rule-based or environment-derived external rewards, implicit reward methods offer unique advantages by discovering and utilizing reward signals that are inherently present in language modeling.”

Self-Ensemble mitigates confidence distortion by dividing choices into smaller groups and aggregating predictions to reduce overconfidence bias.

“Self-Ensemble mitigates confidence distortion by dividing choices into smaller, more manageable groups and aggregating predictions to reduce overconfidence bias.”

• cites Xu et al., 2025bNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Zhao et al. (2024c) builds on this concept by empowering multimodal large language models to serve as powerful data generators, producing diverse training examples across different modalities and tasks through advanced prompt engineering and quality filtering mechanisms.

“Zhao et al. (2024c) builds on this concept by empowering multimodal large language models to serve as powerful data generators, producing diverse training examples across different modalities and tasks through advanced prompt engineering and quality filtering mechanisms.”

• cites Zhao et al., 2024cNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Language as a reward channel enables nuanced, flexible, and sample-efficient self-improvement.

“Such frameworks highlight the power of language as a reward channel, enabling nuanced, flexible, and sample-efficient self-improvement.”

The PIT framework implicitly learns the improvement goal from human preference data without extra human efforts by maximizing the quality gap of the response conditioned on a reference response.

“Moreover, ImPlicit Self-ImprovemenT (PIT) framework (Wang et al., 2024i) implicitly learns the improvement goal from human preference data without extra human efforts by maximizing the quality gap of the response conditioned on a reference response.”

• cites Wang et al., 2024iNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Self-Refine and SELF demonstrate that even state-of-the-art models can be improved via multi-turn, language-based self-critique, without additional supervised data or external reinforcement.

“Self-Refine and SELF further explore iterative self-feedback and selfcorrection, demonstrating that even state-of-the-art models can be improved via multi-turn, language-based self-critique, without additional supervised data or external reinforcement.”

• cites Madaan et al., 2023aNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites Lu et al., 2023Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Zelikman et al. (2022) introduces the foundational framework for self-generated demonstration learning, enabling language models to bootstrap their reasoning capabilities through iterative self-training.

“Zelikman et al. (2022) introduces the foundational framework for self-generated demonstration learning, enabling language models to bootstrap their reasoning capabilities through iterative self-training.”

• cites Zelikman et al., 2022Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

LLMs have an inherent capacity to interpret and learn from implicit feedback cues present in their input context.

“This reveals an inherent capacity for models to interpret and learn from implicit feedback cues present in their input context.”

Environment feedback, including tool-based signals, is central to agentic LLM research.

“Environment feedback, including tool-based signals, is central to agentic LLM research (e.g., SWE-Dev (Du et al., 2025), SICA (Robeyns et al., 2025a), Feedback Friction (Jiang et al., 2025a), USEagent (Applis et al., 2025), DYSTIL (Wang et al., 2025c)), where agents learn through direct interaction with real-world environments and tools.”

• cites Du et al., 2025Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites Robeyns et al., 2025aNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites Jiang et al., 2025aNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Recent work has shown that LLMs inherently encode rewardlike signals through their standard training objectives.

“Recent work has expanded this concept by showing that LLMs inherently encode rewardlike signals through their standard training objectives.”

Agents learn through direct interaction with real-world environments and tools.

“Environment feedback, including tool-based signals, is central to agentic LLM research (e.g., SWE-Dev (Du et al., 2025), SICA (Robeyns et al., 2025a), Feedback Friction (Jiang et al., 2025a), USEagent (Applis et al., 2025), DYSTIL (Wang et al., 2025c)), where agents learn through direct interaction with real-world environments and tools.”

• cites Du et al., 2025Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites Robeyns et al., 2025aNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites Jiang et al., 2025aNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Self-Rewarding Language Models demonstrate that models can act as their own reward function, generating training data through self-instruction and self-evaluation cycles.

“Self-Rewarding Language Models demonstrate that models can act as their own reward function, generating training data through self-instruction and self-evaluation cycles.”

• cites Yuan et al., 2025bNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Across self-play approaches, improvement is driven by self-generated learning signals derived from the agent's own trajectories.

“Across these approaches, improvement is driven by self-generated learning signals derived from the agent's own trajectories.”

Self-Challenging Language Model Agents establishes a framework where an agent alternates between generating and solving complex, multi-step coding tasks, using successful trajectories to fine-tune itself.

“Similarly, Self-Challenging Language Model Agents (Zhou et al., 2025e) establishes a framework where an agent alternates between generating and solving complex, multi-step coding tasks, using successful trajectories to fine-tune itself.”

• cites Zhou et al., 2025eNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

The Sol-Ver framework has an LLM co-evolve its ability to both generate code (solver) and create corresponding unit tests (verifier).

“as seen in the Sol-Ver framework (Lin et al., 2025b), where an LLM co-evolves its ability to both generate code (solver) and create corresponding unit tests (verifier).”

• cites Lin et al., 2025bNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Qu et al. (2024b) demonstrates how agents can be trained to systematically improve their behavior through structured self-reflection and demonstration generation.

“Qu et al. (2024b) demonstrates how agents can be trained to systematically improve their behavior through structured self-reflection and demonstration generation.”

• cites Qu et al., 2024bNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Self-play has been adapted for LLMs and LLM Agents, enabling them to bootstrap their capabilities from zero or minimal external data.

“This powerful principle has been adapted for LLMs and LLM Agents, enabling them to bootstrap their capabilities from zero or minimal external data.”

Socratic-Zero uses a Solver co-evolving with a Teacher that creates challenges and a Generator that distills the Teacher's strategy for scalable curriculum creation.

“A more complex multi-agent dynamic is seen in Socratic-Zero (Wang et al., 2025m), where a Solver co-evolves with a powerful Teacher that creates challenges and a Generator that distills the Teacher's strategy for scalable curriculum creation.”

• cites Wang et al., 2025mNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

The classic 'Evolved Synthetic Creatures' co-evolved agent morphology and neural controllers in a simulated 3D world, leading to the discovery of a wide variety of novel and effective locomotion strategies.

“For example, the classic”

• cites Sims, 1994 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Absolute Zero and R-Zero employ a 'challenger' or 'proposer' agent that generates problems at the frontier of a 'solver' agent's capabilities.

“For instance, Absolute Zero (Zhao et al., 2025a) and R-Zero (Huang et al., 2025b) employ a”

• cites Zhao et al., 2025aNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites Huang et al., 2025bNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

By ensuring that only high-confidence, high-quality examples are used for training, confidence-based demonstration selection helps to maintain the integrity of the learning process.

“By ensuring that only high-confidence, high-quality examples are used for training, this approach helps to maintain the integrity of the learning process.”

Confidence-based approaches utilize the model's uncertainty estimates to determine which demonstrations are most likely to contribute positively to learning, filtering out potentially detrimental or low-quality examples.

“Confidence-based approaches (Li et al., 2024b) utilize the model's uncertainty estimates to determine which demonstrations are most likely to contribute positively to learning, filtering out potentially detrimental or low-quality examples.”

• cites Li et al., 2024bNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

GENOME directly applies genetic algorithms to language model parameter evolution, maintaining populations and using crossover, mutation, and selection operators on model weights.

“The Nature-Inspired Population-Based Evolution (GENOME) framework (Zhang et al., 2025r) directly applies genetic algorithms to language model parameter evolution, maintaining populations and using crossover, mutation, and selection operators on model weights.”

• cites Zhang et al., 2025rNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

R-Few introduces a guided approach where the challenger is grounded by a small set of human examples to prevent concept drift and diversity collapse.

“To address the instability of purely autonomous systems, R-Few (Yu et al., 2025b) introduces a guided approach where the challenger is grounded by a small set of human examples to prevent concept drift and diversity collapse.”

• cites Yu et al., 2025bNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

By leveraging parallel search and genetic variation, population-based methods enable broader search coverage and the discovery of novel solutions that might be missed by gradient-based optimization.

“By leveraging parallel search and genetic variation, these methods enable broader search coverage and the discovery of novel solutions that might be missed by gradient-based optimization.”

SPIN establishes a foundational approach where current models compete against previous versions, creating evolutionary pressure for improvement.

“Self-Play Fine-Tuning (SPIN) (Chen et al., 2024f) establishes a foundational approach where current models compete against previous versions, creating evolutionary pressure for improvement.”

• cites Chen et al., 2024fNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

In agent settings, off-policy methods excel in sample efficiency, allowing agents to leverage historical data, expert demonstrations, and cross-agent learning.

“In agent settings, off-policy methods excel in sample efficiency, allowing agents to leverage historical data, expert demonstrations, and cross-agent learning.”

In Agent0, the curriculum agent is trained to generate frontier tasks that challenge the executor.

“The curriculum agent is trained to generate frontier tasks that challenge the executor.”

• cites Xia et al., 2025bNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

WizardLM demonstrates how to progressively evolve the complexity of self-generated instructions, pushing the model's capabilities on more challenging tasks.

“Building on this, WizardLM(Xu et al., 2024a) demonstrates how to progressively evolve the complexity of these self-generated instructions, pushing the model's capabilities on more challenging tasks.”

• cites Xu et al., 2024aNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

In Agent0, the improved tool-use capabilities of the executor in turn drive the creation of a more complex, tool-aware curriculum, establishing a virtuous cycle of self-improvement.

“Then, the improved tool-use capabilities of the executor in turn drive the creation of a more complex, tool-aware curriculum, establishing a virtuous cycle of self-improvement.”

• cites Xia et al., 2025bNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

By leveraging process-based rewards, agents can improve their capabilities in a progressive, step-by-step manner.

“By leveraging processbased rewards, agents can improve their capabilities in a progressive, step-by-step manner.”

Process-supervised reward models (PRMs) have been demonstrated to be significantly more reliable than outcome-supervised reward models (ORMs), particularly in domains requiring complex reasoning like solving math problems.

“Process-supervised reward models (PRMs) have been demonstrated to be significantly more reliable than outcome-supervised reward models (ORMs), particularly in domains requiring complex reasoning like solving math problems(Lightman et al., 2023).”

• cites Lightman et al., 2023Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

On-policy methods suffer from low sample efficiency, as each policy update requires fresh data collection, making them computationally expensive for complex multi-step reasoning or tool use scenarios where generating high-quality trajectories is costly.

“However, they suffer from low sample efficiency, as each policy update requires fresh data collection, making them computationally expensive for complex multi-step reasoning or tool use scenarios where generating high-quality trajectories is costly.”

Agent0 introduces a framework that evolves agents from zero data via a co-evolutionary loop between a curriculum agent and an executor agent.

“Agent0 (Xia et al., 2025b) introduces a framework that evolves agents from zero data via a co-evolutionary loop between a curriculum agent and an executor agent.”

• cites Xia et al., 2025bNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

A primary strategy in offline learning is LLM bootstrapping, where a model enhances its own capabilities using its self-generated content.

“A primary strategy in this domain is LLM bootstrapping, where a model enhances its own capabilities using its self-generated content.”

Current memory mechanisms struggle significantly with dynamic state updates and maintaining consistency across extended interactions.

“Current memory mechanisms struggle significantly with dynamic state updates and maintaining consistency across extended interactions (Hu et al., 2025).”

• cites Hu et al., 2025Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Co-evolving agents and auxiliary models (e.g., reward or world models) achieve more robust, generalizable, and scalable learning in LLM agentic systems.

“Together, these methods demonstrate the effectiveness of co-evolving agents and auxiliary models (e.g., reward or world models) to achieve more robust, generalizable, and scalable learning in LLM agentic systems.”

Static assessment inherently does not capture the dynamic, continuous learning, or long-term evolutionary aspects central to self-evolving agents.

“While useful for assessing generalization in an 'in-domain evolving, out-of-domain evaluation' paradigm, static assessment inherently does not capture the dynamic, continuous learning, or long-term evolutionary aspects central to self-evolving agents.”

• AssumptionRests on an assumption: Self-evolving agents are distinct from static systems.

Many studies augment existing benchmarks with a temporal dimension to track performance over time, typically analyzing performance as a function of iterations, steps, or examples.

“Many studies leverage existing benchmarks but introduce a new dimension to track performance over time. This typically involves analyzing performance as a function of the number of iterations, steps, or examples.”

• cites Hu et al., 2024cNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites Wang et al., 2024jNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites Fang et al., 2025bNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Curriculum learning enables agents to autonomously expand their capabilities through iterative task adaptation.

“These approaches highlight how curriculum learning enables agents to autonomously expand their capabilities through iterative task adaptation.”

Self-evolving LLM agents can dynamically adapt to both learners and instructors, driving more personalized, effective, and scalable educational experiences.

“Collectively, these examples illustrate how self-evolving LLM agents can dynamically adapt to both learners and instructors, driving more personalized, effective, and scalable educational experiences.”

Model-scaffold synergy is critical for efficiency.

“-model-scaffold synergy critical for efficiency.”

Most benchmarks measure improvement under pre-specified learning protocols rather than assessing whether agents autonomously discover effective adaptation strategies.

“Moreover, most benchmarks measure improvement under pre-specified learning protocols (e.g., fixed iteration budgets or predetermined replay schedules) rather than assessing whether agents autonomously discover effective adaptation strategies.”

Scaling replay buffers beyond optimal thresholds triggers performance degradation through context overflow and resource exhaustion.

“scaling them beyond optimal thresholds triggers performance degradation through context overflow and resource exhaustion (Zheng et al., 2025b).”

• cites Zheng et al., 2025bNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Memory serves as the foundation that enables agents to internalize past experiences, abstract high-level patterns, and refine their future behavior.

“In these examples, memory serves as the foundation that enables agents to internalize past experiences, abstract high-level patterns, and refine their future behavior.”

The degree of self-directedness creates fundamental trade-offs across evaluation dimensions.

“The degree of self-directedness, specifically whether the agent autonomously generates tasks and evolution strategies or follows externally provided curricula, creates fundamental trade-offs across evaluation dimensions.”

SEAgent achieved 23.2 percentage point improvements, advancing from 11.3% to 34.5% via autonomous software exploration and curriculum evolution.

“while SEAgent achieved 23.2 percentage point improvements, advancing from 11.3% to 34.5% via autonomous software exploration and curriculum evolution (Sun et al., 2025c).”

• cites Sun et al., 2025cNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Retention remains the most underserved dimension in the evaluation of self-evolving agents.

“Retention remains the most underserved dimension.”

WebRL improved from 4.8% to 42.4% by self-generating tasks from exploration failures.

“WebRL improved from 4.8% to 42.4% by self-generating tasks from exploration failures (Qi et al., 2024)”

• cites Qi et al., 2024Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Episodic evaluation fundamentally precludes measurement of knowledge accumulation or degradation.

“fundamentally precluding measurement of knowledge accumulation or degradation—precisely the phenomena that distinguish self-evolving agents from static systems.”

• AssumptionRests on an assumption: Self-evolving agents are distinct from static systems.

Autonomous evolution incurs measurable risks.

“However, autonomous evolution incurs measurable risks.”

Evaluation horizons remain limited to short-term improvement curves.

“yet evaluation horizons remain limited to shortterm improvement curves.”

Current agent systems frequently encounter a trade-off between specialization and generalization, where agents optimized for specific tasks struggle to transfer learned behaviors to novel environments.

“Current agent systems frequently encounter a trade-off between specialization and generalization, where agents optimized for specific tasks struggle to transfer their learned behaviors to novel environments (Chen et al., 2024d).”

• cites Chen et al., 2024dNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

MemoryAgentBench includes a Test-Time Learning (TTL) dimension that evaluates an agent's ability to learn new tasks directly from conversation within a single interaction session.

“MemoryAgentBench (Hu et al., 2025), for example, includes a 'Test-Time Learning' (TTL) dimension that evaluates an agent's ability to learn new tasks directly from conversation within a single interaction session.”

• cites Hu et al., 2025Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

No evaluation examines whether agents can autonomously evolve their architecture selection strategies, learning which topologies work best for different query types, while respecting real-time operational constraints.

“No evaluation examines whether agents can autonomously evolve their architecture selection strategies, learning which topologies work best for different query types, while respecting real-time operational constraints (millisecond response latencies, per-query token budgets).”

The absence of consistent latency/cost/safety reporting across nearly all methods underscores a key gap that limits broader synthesis.

“The absence of consistent latency/cost/safety reporting across nearly all methods underscores a key gap that limits broader synthesis.”

The TRACE framework addresses benchmark saturation by enabling agents to evolve tasks to higher difficulty through test-time exploration.

“Similarly, the TRACE framework (Guo et al., 2025a) addresses benchmark saturation by enabling agents to evolve tasks to higher difficulty through test-time exploration.”

• cites Guo et al., 2025aNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Because these factors interact, normalizing results across methods would risk over-interpreting uncontrolled differences.

“Because these factors interact with one another, normalizing results across methods would risk over-interpreting uncontrolled differences.”

Traditional personalization evaluation metrics often fail to adequately capture the evolving dynamics inherent in self-evolving agents.

“Traditional personalization evaluation metrics often fail to adequately capture the evolving dynamics inherent in self-evolving agents.”

Reflective and memory-augmented self-evolving approaches continue to encounter limitations when addressing complex real-world scenarios that require sustained adaptation over prolonged periods.

“Nonetheless, these approaches continue to encounter limitations when addressing complex real-world scenarios that require sustained adaptation over prolonged periods.”

Short-horizon adaptations are widely used for current self-evolving agents.

“This category is widely used for current selfevolving agents.”

Current architecture search methods operate offline over extended periods to discover optimal workflows.

“Current architecture search methods (e.g., AFlow (Zhang et al., 2024c), ADAS (Hu et al., 2024c)) operate offline over extended periods to discover optimal workflows.”

• cites Zhang et al., 2024cNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites Hu et al., 2024cNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Primary metrics for short-horizon adaptations include Success Rate by Iteration Steps, Learning Curve Analysis, and Adaptation Speed.

“The primary metrics and methods for short-horizon adaptations are designed to quantify Adaptivity. These include: (1) Success Rate by Iteration Steps (Hu et al., 2024c; Wang et al., 2024j; Zheng et al., 2025b), which tracks performance improvements as the agent interacts more with the environment or attempts a task multiple times; (2) Learning Curve Analysis, which visualizes how performance (e.g.”

• cites Hu et al., 2024cNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites Wang et al., 2024jNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites Zheng et al., 2025bNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Currently, there are few benchmarks of the long-horizon lifelong learning type.

“Currently, there are few benchmarks of this type.”

Metrics for long-horizon lifelong learning include Forgetting (FGT), Backward Transfer (BWT), and Cost-per-Gain.

“Metrics for long-horizon lifelong learning go beyond simple success rates to quantify the agent's evolving ability, such as Forgetting (FGT), Backward Transfer (BWT) (Zheng et al., 2025c), and Cost-per-Gain.”

• cites Zheng et al., 2025cNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Existing works differ substantially in reporting practices, evaluation pipelines, backbone model choices, and architectural design.

“Existing works differ substantially in (1) reporting practices: key metrics such as latency, cost, and safety are often omitted or defined inconsistently; (2) evaluation pipelines: prompt formats, rollout budgets, tool access, and environment configurations vary widely; (3) backbone model choices: even nominally similar models differ in size, training data, or inference settings; and (4) arch”

The limited temporal window of short-horizon adaptations makes it challenging to assess long-term knowledge retention and true lifelong learning capabilities across vastly different or sequentially presented tasks.

“However, the limited temporal window makes it challenging to assess long-term knowledge retention (mitigating catastrophic forgetting) and true lifelong learning capabilities across vastly different or sequentially presented tasks.”

True apples-to-apples comparison remains infeasible at present.

“However, as the table also makes clear, true apples-to-apples comparison remains infeasible at present.”

Adaptive reward models and optimized dynamic network structures can significantly enhance cooperative self-improvement among agents.

“(Hu et al., 2024d) introduced adaptive reward models and optimized dynamic network structures, which can significantly enhance cooperative self-improvement among agents.”

• cites Hu et al., 2024dNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

There is an absence of clear mechanisms for agents to dynamically manage and update their knowledge.

“However, a major gap identified by (Sun et al., 2025a) is the absence of clear mechanisms for agents to dynamically manage and update their knowledge.”

• cites Sun et al., 2025aNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

The stability-plasticity dilemma becomes particularly acute in foundation model-based agents, where the computational costs of retraining for every new task are prohibitive.

“The stability-plasticity dilemma becomes particularly acute in foundation model-based agents, where the computational costs of retraining for every new task are prohibitive (Zheng et al., 2025c).”

• cites Zheng et al., 2025cNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Agents that create or ingest external tools can become a potential vector for security threats.

“This turns the agent into a potential vector for security threats.”

In memory evolution, the accumulation of experience can inadvertently induce unsafe behaviors.

“This is particularly evident in memory evolution, where the accumulation of experience can inadvertently induce unsafe behaviors.”

The ability of agents to autonomously generate and use tools introduces significant safety issues.

“The ability of agents to autonomously generate and use tools introduces significant safety issues.”

The nature of self-evolution introduces unique and amplified risks that emerge dynamically over the agent's lifecycle.

“Unlike static systems, the very nature of self-evolution introduces unique and amplified risks that emerge dynamically over the agent's lifecycle.”

The effectiveness of meta-learning strategies for cross-domain adaptation critically depends on an agent's capability to accurately determine when supplementary computational resources are necessary and efficiently distribute these resources across diverse reasoning tasks.

“However, their effectiveness critically depends on an agent's capability to accurately determine when supplementary computational resources are necessary and efficiently distribute these resources across diverse reasoning tasks.”

Agents' struggle to differentiate sensitive information can potentially lead them to create tools that leak private data.

“potentially leading them to create tools that leak private data.”

Agents may find and exploit loopholes in self-defined reward signals or internal feedback.

“Agents may find and exploit loopholes in self-defined reward signals or internal feedback.”

Collective discussions can significantly enhance diagnostic reasoning.

“While collective discussions can significantly enhance diagnostic reasoning, agents often risk becoming overly reliant on group consensus, thereby diminishing their independent reasoning capabilities.”

Open-ended evolution is susceptible to reward hacking.

“Open-ended evolution is susceptible to reward hacking.”

Risks of reward hacking in memory evolution can be exacerbated by poorly designed memory modules.

“and such risks can be further exacerbated by poorly designed memory modules (Wang et al., 2025b).”

• cites Wang et al., 2025bNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Hybrid validation frameworks like OS-Sentinel combine formal verifiers with contextual judges to provide robust, in-workflow safety monitoring for GUI agents.

“For GUI agents, hybrid validation frameworks like OS-Sentinel combine formal verifiers with contextual judges to provide robust, in-workflow safety monitoring (Sun et al., 2025b).”

• cites Sun et al., 2025bNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Agents in multi-agent environments often risk becoming overly reliant on group consensus, thereby diminishing their independent reasoning capabilities.

“While collective discussions can significantly enhance diagnostic reasoning, agents often risk becoming overly reliant on group consensus, thereby diminishing their independent reasoning capabilities.”

LLM-based agents often fail to effectively propagate newly acquired knowledge from interactions to other agents, restricting their collaborative potential.

“In particular, Geng et al. (2025b) found that LLMbased agents often fail to effectively propagate newly acquired knowledge from interactions to other agents, restricting their collaborative potential.”

• cites Geng et al., 2025bNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.