CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 1Evolutionary Algorithms and ApplicationsAI-based Problem Solving and PlanningAdvanced Software Engineering Methodologies

A Theory of Reliable Self-Evolution for Agent Harnesses

Open access
Cai, Qianshu, Zhang, Yonggang, Nie, Jun, Ran, Maohao, Zheng, Huajiang, Song, Jun, Tian, Xinmei, Guo, Yike +1 more·2026·arXiv
DOI 10.48550/arxiv.2609.08175arXiv 2609.08175
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

In harness self-evolution, agents modify their own prompts, code, tools, and orchestration while keeping the underlying language model fixed. Recent work has shown that agents can improve themselves in response to task failures and achieve substantial performance gains. However, gains on failed tasks do not automatically ensure that performance on previously successful tasks is preserved, raising concerns about reliable adoption. In this work, we provide a theoretically grounded condition under which a self-evolved harness can be reliably adopted. We then propose a validation rule to make the evolved system satisfy the reliable adoption condition with theoretical guarantees. Consequently, the system can achieve progressive improvement through evolution. This leads to a natural question: Does reliable self-evolution have a performance ceiling, and which factors govern this ceiling? Our theoretical results show that the performance ceiling is determined by the costs of verification and evaluation. On the other hand, self-evolution may stall in practice. In this regard, we show that experimental evidence on agent performance shifts can be used to identify the sources of stagnation. Our work thus establishes a theoretical framework for understanding and advancing reliable harness self-evolution.

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.2609.08175

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?

  • Safe Harness derives finite-run guarantees and separates generation from certification bottlenecks.

    “It derives finite-run guarantees and separates generation from certification bottlenecks.”

    From SGM: A Statistical Godel Machine for Risk-Controlled Recursive Self-Modification (2025) · cites this paper as Cai et al., 2026

  • Safe Harness analyzes modification generation, finite-data certification and selection, safe adoption, and opportunities after an update.

    “Safe Harness (Cai et al., 2026), released in September 2026, analyzes modification generation, finite-data certification and selection, safe adoption, and opportunities after an update.”

    From SGM: A Statistical Godel Machine for Risk-Controlled Recursive Self-Modification (2025) · cites this paper as Cai et al., 2026

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

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 46

  1. Carlo Acerbi and Dirk Tasche. On the coherence of expected shortfall. Journal of Banking & Finance, 26(7):1487-1503, 2002. doi:10.1016/S0378-4266(02)00283-2. · DOI
  2. Edoardo Botta, Yuchen Li, Aashay Mehta, Jordan T. Ash, Cyril Zhang, and Andrej Risteski. On the query complexity of verifier-assisted language generation. In Proceedings of the 42nd International Conference on Machine Learning, 2025.
  3. Qianshu Cai, Yonggang Zhang, Xianzhang Jia, Huajiang Zheng, Wei Xue, Jun Song, Xinmei Tian, and Yike Guo. MOSS: Self-evolution through source-level rewriting in autonomous agent systems. arXiv preprint arXiv:2605.22794, 2026. · arXiv
  4. Mark Chen, Jerry Tworek, Heewoo Jun, et al. Evaluating large language models trained on code. arXiv preprint arXiv:2107.03374, 2021. · arXiv
  5. Tingyang Chen, Shuo Lu, Kang Zhao, Weicheng Meng, Hanlin Teng, Tianhao Li, Chao Li, Xule Liu, Jian Liang, Zhizhong Zhang, Yuan Xie, Heng Qu, Kun Shao, and Jian Luan. HarnessX: A composable, adaptive, and evolvable agent harness foundry. arXiv preprint arXiv:2606.14249, 2026. · arXiv
  6. Christoph Dann, Lihong Li, Wei Wei, and Emma Brunskill. Policy certificates: Towards accountable reinforcement learning. In Proceedings of the 36th International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML), volume 97 of Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, pages 1507-1516, 2019.
  7. Laurens de Haan and Ana Ferreira. Extreme Value Theory: An Introduction. Springer Series in Operations Research and Financial Engineering. Springer, New York, 2006. doi:10.1007/0-387-34471-3. · DOI
  8. Paul Doukhan. Mixing: Properties and Examples, volume 85 of Lecture Notes in Statistics. Springer-Verlag, New York, 1994. doi:10.1007/978-1-4612-2642-0. · DOI
  9. Chrisantha Fernando, Dylan Banarse, Henryk Michalewski, Simon Osindero, and Tim Rocktäschel. Promptbreeder: Self-referential self-improvement via prompt evolution. arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.16797, 2023. · arXiv
  10. Tuomas Haarnoja, Haoran Tang, Pieter Abbeel, and Sergey Levine. Reinforcement learning with deep energy- based policies. In Proceedings of the 34th International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML), volume 70 of Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, pages 1352-1361. PMLR, 2017.
  11. Yufei He, Juncheng Liu, Yue Liu, Yibo Li, Tri Cao, Zhiyuan Hu, Xinxing Xu, and Bryan Hooi. EvoTest: Evolutionary test-time learning for self-improving agentic systems. In International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR), 2026.
  12. Steven R. Howard, Aaditya Ramdas, Jon McAuliffe, and Jasjeet Sekhon. Time-uniform, nonparametric, nonasymptotic confidence sequences. The Annals of Statistics, 49(2):1055-1080, 2021. doi:10.1214/20-AOS1991. · DOI · Paper page
  13. Jie Hu. Oracle gap and signal fidelity: A fixed-pool diagnostic for test-time collaboration. arXiv preprint arXiv:2607.17531, 2026. · arXiv
  14. Shengran Hu, Cong Lu, and Jeff Clune. Automated design of agentic systems. In International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR), 2025.
  15. Sham Kakade and John Langford. Approximately optimal approximate reinforcement learning. In Proceedings of the Nineteenth International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML), pages 267-274.
  16. Morgan Kaufmann, 2002.
  17. Romain Laroche, Paul Trichelair, and Rémi Tachet des Combes. Safe policy improvement with baseline bootstrapping. In Proceedings of the 36th International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML), volume 97 of Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, pages 3652-3661. PMLR, 2019.
  18. Yoonho Lee, Roshen Nair, Qizheng Zhang, Kangwook Lee, Omar Khattab, and Chelsea Finn. Meta-harness: End-to-end optimization of model harnesses. arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.28052, 2026. · arXiv
  19. Sergey Levine. Reinforcement learning and control as probabilistic inference: Tutorial and review. arXiv preprint arXiv:1805.00909, 2018. · arXiv
  20. Jiahang Lin, Shichun Liu, Chengjun Pan, Lizhi Lin, Shihan Dou, Zhiheng Xi, Xuanjing Huang, Hang Yan, Zhenhua Han, Tao Gui, and Yu-Gang Jiang. Agentic harness engineering: Observability-driven automatic evolution of coding-agent harnesses. arXiv preprint arXiv:2604.25850, 2026. · arXiv
  21. Andreas Maurer and Massimiliano Pontil. Empirical Bernstein bounds and sample variance penalization. In Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Conference on Learning Theory (COLT), 2009.
  22. Mehryar Mohri and Afshin Rostamizadeh. Rademacher complexity bounds for non-I.I.D. processes. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 21 (NIPS 2008), pages 1097-1104, 2008.
  23. Youssef Mroueh. Information theoretic guarantees for policy alignment in large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.05883, 2024. · arXiv
  24. Kimia Nadjahi, Romain Laroche, and Rémi Tachet des Combes. Safe policy improvement with soft baseline bootstrap- ping. In Machine Learning and Knowledge Discovery in Databases (ECML PKDD 2019), Part III, volume 11908 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 53-68. Springer, 2020. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-46133-1_4. · DOI
  25. Jun Nie, Yonggang Zhang, Jun Song, Qianshu Cai, Dahai Yu, Yike Guo, Xinmei Tian, and Bo Han. TTHE: Test-time harness evolution. arXiv preprint arXiv:2607.08124, 2026. · arXiv
  26. Alexander Novikov, Ngân Vũ, Marvin Eisenberger, Emilien Dupont, Po-Sen Huang, Adam Zsolt Wagner, Sergey Shirobokov, Borislav Kozlovskii, Francisco J. R. Ruiz, Abbas Mehrabian, M. Pawan Kumar, Abigail See, Swarat Chaudhuri, George Holland, Alex Davies, Sebastian Nowozin, Pushmeet Kohli, and Matej Balog. Alphaevolve: A coding agent for scientific and algorithmic discovery. arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.13131, 2025. · arXiv
  27. Marek Petrik, Mohammad Ghavamzadeh, and Yinlam Chow. Safe policy improvement by minimizing robust baseline regret. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS), volume 29, 2016.
  28. Maxime Robeyns, Martin Szummer, and Laurence Aitchison. A self-improving coding agent. arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.15228, 2025. · arXiv
  29. Marco Robol and Paolo Giorgini. Self-evolving software agents. arXiv preprint arXiv:2604.27264, 2026. · arXiv
  30. R. Tyrrell Rockafellar and Stanislav Uryasev. Conditional value-at-risk for general loss distributions. Journal of Banking & Finance, 26(7):1443-1471, 2002. doi:10.1016/S0378-4266(02)00271-6. · DOI
  31. Jürgen Schmidhuber. Gödel machines: Fully self-referential optimal universal self-improvers. In Ben Goertzel and Cassio Pennachin, editors, Artificial General Intelligence, Cognitive Technologies, pages 199-226. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2007. doi:10.1007/978-3-540-68677-4_7. · DOI · Paper page
  32. John Schulman, Sergey Levine, Pieter Abbeel, Michael I. Jordan, and Philipp Moritz. Trust region policy optimization. In Proceedings of the 32nd International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML), volume 37 of Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, pages 1889-1897. PMLR, 2015.
  33. Arsenios Scrivens. Information-theoretic limits of safety verification for self-improving systems. arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.28650, 2026. · arXiv
  34. Yu Shang, Yu Li, Keyu Zhao, Likai Ma, Jiahe Liu, Fengli Xu, and Yong Li. AgentSquare: Automatic LLM agent search in modular design space. arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.06153, 2024. · arXiv
  35. Charlie Snell, Jaehoon Lee, Kelvin Xu, and Aviral Kumar. Scaling LLM test-time compute optimally can be more effective than scaling model parameters. arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.03314, 2024. · arXiv
  36. Yuda Song, Hanlin Zhang, Carson Eisenach, Sham M. 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
  37. Xueqiao Sun, Xiaohan Wang, Ludwig Schmidt, Serena Yeung-Levy, and Yuhui Zhang. Learning from failure: Inference-time self-improvement for computer-use agents. arXiv preprint arXiv:2606.31270, 2026. · arXiv
  38. Adith Swaminathan and Thorsten Joachims. Batch learning from logged bandit feedback through counterfactual risk minimization. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 16(52):1731-1755, 2015.
  39. Philip S. Thomas, Georgios Theocharous, and Mohammad Ghavamzadeh. High confidence policy improvement. In Proceedings of the 32nd International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML), volume 37 of Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, pages 2380-2388. PMLR, 2015.
  40. Charles L. Wang, Keir Dorchen, and Peter Jin. On the statistical limits of self-improving agents. arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.04399, 2025a. · arXiv
  41. Guanzhi Wang, Yuqi Xie, Yunfan Jiang, Ajay Mandlekar, Chaowei Xiao, Yuke Zhu, Linxi Fan, and Anima Anandkumar. Voyager: An open-ended embodied agent with large language models. Transactions on Machine Learning Research (TMLR), 2024.
  42. Kaiwen Wang, Nathan Kallus, and Wen Sun. Near-minimax-optimal risk-sensitive reinforcement learning with CVaR. In Proceedings of the 40th International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML), volume 202 of Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, pages 35864-35907. PMLR, 2023.
  43. Wenyi Wang, Piotr Piękos, Li Nanbo, Firas Laakom, Yimeng Chen, Mateusz Ostaszewski, Mingchen Zhuge, and Jürgen Schmidhuber. Huxley-gödel machine: Human-level coding agent development by an approximation of the optimal self-improving machine. arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.21614, 2025b. · arXiv
  44. Yotam Wolf, Noam Wies, Oshri Avnery, Yoav Levine, and Amnon Shashua. Fundamental limitations of alignment in large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.11082, 2023. · arXiv
  45. Tianshi Xu, Huifeng Wen, and Meng Li. Adapting the interface, not the model: Runtime harness adaptation for deterministic LLM agents. arXiv preprint arXiv:2605.22166, 2026. · arXiv
  46. Zhe Yang, Yichang Zhang, Yudong Wang, Ziyao Xu, Junyang Lin, and Zhifang Sui. A probabilistic inference scaling theory for LLM self-correction. arXiv preprint arXiv:2508.16456, 2025. · arXiv

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Cai, Q., Zhang, Y., Nie, J., Ran, M., Zheng, H., Song, J., Tian, X., Guo, Y., & Xue, W.
Affiliations
  • Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (HK)
  • University of Science and Technology of China (CN)
  • Hong Kong Baptist University (HK)
ORCID
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2026
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.2609.08175
arXiv
2609.08175
OpenAlex
W7212064622
Cited by
0
References
0
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Licence
arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Evolutionary Algorithms and Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI-based Problem Solving and Planning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Advanced Software Engineering Methodologies
Keywords
prompt tuning, language model fine-tuning, stagnation, evaluation costs, frozen language models, reinforcement learning from human feedback

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