From AI Assistant to AI Scientist: Autonomous Discovery of LLM-RL Algorithms with LLM Agents
Open accessAbstract
Discovering improved policy optimization algorithms for language models remains a costly manual process requiring repeated mechanism-level modification and validation. Unlike simple combinatorial code search, this problem requires searching over algorithmic mechanisms tightly coupled with training dynamics while reusing empirical evidence across iterations. We propose POISE, a closed-loop framework for automated discovery of policy optimization algorithms for language models. POISE maintains a structured, genealogically linked archive linking proposals, executable implementations, standardized evaluations, and natural-language reflections to support evidence-driven iteration. In mathematical reasoning experiments starting from GRPO, POISE evaluates 64 candidate algorithms and discovers improved mechanisms, including analytic-variance scaling and validity masking. The best variant improves weighted Overall from 47.8 to 52.5 (+4.6) and increases AIME25 pass@32 from 26.7% to 43.3%, demonstrating the feasibility of automated policy optimization discovery while supporting interpretable design principles.
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?
EVOM meta-evolves actor-critic architectures, POISE autonomously discovers new policy-optimization algorithms for LLM training itself, and MLEvolve targets machine-learning engineering pipelines end to end.
“EVOM meta-evolves actor-critic architectures [165]; POISE autonomously discovers new policy-optimization algorithms for LLM training itself [166]; MLEvolve targets machine-learning engineering pipelines end to end [167].”
From Recursive Self-Improvement in AI: From Bounded Self-Refinement to Autonomous Research Loops (2026) · cites this paper as [166]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Recursive Self-Improvement in AI: From Bounded Self-Refinement to Autonomous Research Loops
Chen, M., Wang, L., & Qu, B. (2026) · arXiv
“EVOM meta-evolves actor-critic architectures [160]; POISE autonomously discovers new policy-optimization algorithms for LLM training itself [161]; MLEvolve targets machine-learning engineering pipelines end to end [162].”
- Authors
- Xia, S., Zhang, Y., Chen, A., Wu, S., Yuan, S., & Xiao, Y.
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2026
- Pages
- 52498-52523
- arXiv
- 2603.23951
- OpenAlex
- W7140405501
- Cited by
- 0
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP (Findings of EMNLP) (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Reinforcement Learning in Robotics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Evolutionary Algorithms and Applications
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Artificial Intelligence Applications
- Keywords
- large language models, reinforcement learning from human feedback, LLM agents, Group Relative Policy Optimization, poise, interpretability
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