PreprintCited by 1Computability, Logic, AI Algorithmssemigroups and automata theoryArtificial Intelligence Applications

A Relative-Computability Theory of Self-Improving Agents

Open access
Lu, Chien-Ping·2026·arXiv

Abstract

Agents increasingly modify the procedures by which they solve tasks and improve themselves. Autonomy over improvement, gains in practical capability, and enlargement of computational reach are distinct properties. We develop an oracle-relative model with mutable solvers, evaluators, and improvers. Uniform simulation keeps every total decision procedure produced by effective self-revision over $A$ within $\mathcal{C}(A)=\{D:D\leq_T A\}$; oracle joins account for additional access, while the relativized limit lemma separates limiting answers from effective completion. A worked model of Boolean rule acquisition makes the distinction constructive. For a known finite-dimensional feature language, we characterize exactly which answers a query history determines, obtain a sharp teacher-query bound, and give a terminating protocol that permits revisions to the query proposer. The learned solver can dispense with the teacher on every input while remaining in the same computability layer. However, uniformly constructing the required feature-span specification from arbitrary effective feature programs is already as hard as the relative halting problem. We also give a conditional criterion for strict ascent and distinguish it from finite behavioral evidence. The framework thus separates acquisition, certification, and computability ascent, identifying both a positive route to verified support removal and the assumptions on which it depends.

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2605.27381

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

  • A formal separation result shows that finite internal self-modification keeps a system within its current computational layer-under the paper's modeling assumptions, no amount of repeated internal revision yields the qualitative capability jump that RSI narratives assume, which would require stabilized access to an external oracle.

    “a formal separation result shows that finite internal self-modification keeps a system within its current computational layer - under the paper's modeling assumptions, no amount of repeated internal revision yields the qualitative capability jump that RSI narratives casually assume, which would require something like stabilized access to an external oracle [191].”

    From Recursive Self-Improvement in AI: From Bounded Self-Refinement to Autonomous Research Loops (2026) · cites this paper as [191]

  • 'Recursively self-improving' and 'unboundedly self-improving' are different claims, and only the first is licensed by internal revision.

    “The result disciplines the vocabulary: 'recursively self-improving' and 'unboundedly self-improving' are different claims, and only the first is licensed by internal revision.”

    From Recursive Self-Improvement in AI: From Bounded Self-Refinement to Autonomous Research Loops (2026) · cites this paper as [191]

Cites

  • Meta$^n$: Recursive Self-Improvement through Emergent Depth

    Kim, Z. M., Lee, Y.-J., Jwa, S., & Kang, D. (2026) · arXiv · cited 2×

    “Meta n repeatedly applies a fixed meta-operation to generated solver layers and their traces, choosing depth through its operational convergence criterion (Kim et al., 2026).”

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lu, C.-P.
Corresponding author
Lu, Chien-Ping
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2026
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W7162649137
Cited by
0
References
1
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › Computability, Logic, AI Algorithms
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › semigroups and automata theory
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Artificial Intelligence Applications
Keywords
Turing jump, oracle computation, self-improving AI, recursive self-improvement, internal revision, computability theory

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