Skip to content

Closing the Consistency Gap: Self-Evolving Agents That Learn to Stay on Course

Sep 2026 · 0 citations · 26 references
Computer Science

TL;DR

This work presents a self-evolving agent framework that reduces the consistency gap by identifying unstable, low-consistency steps in agent trajectories and converting them into episodic memory the agent can draw on in future runs.

Abstract

Large language model (LLM)-powered agents can be accurate on average yet unreliable in production, a discrepancy that has been observed but remains largely unaddressed. When given the same task five times, a ReAct agent on the AppWorld benchmark using GPT-4.1 succeeds in all five runs only 53% of the time, even though its per-run pass rate averages 77%. We call this 24-point shortfall the consistency gap, and we argue that addressing it is a precondition for trustworthy AI agent deployment. We present a self-evolving agent framework that reduces this gap by identifying unstable, low-consistency steps in agent trajectories and converting them into episodic memory the agent can draw on in future runs. At its core is a Consistency Analyzer that pinpoints where and why a trajectory is likely to flip across executions, and a Guideline Generator that converts the diagnosis into targeted guidelines, committed to memory and injected into future agent executions on similar tasks. On AppWorld with ReAct/GPT-4.1, our framework raises the fraction of tasks that succeed in all five runs by +16 points on same-task evaluation and +13 points on similar-task generalization.

View source

Similar papers

#artificial intelligence Preprint Aug 2026

Safety Does Not Compose: Non-Decaying Loop State for Autonomous LLM Agents

LoopHarness is presented, which restores a persistent, non-decaying safety state at the loop level at the loop level, and gives a complete evaluation protocol on native Agent-SafetyBench tasks with paired clean and attacked episodes, an outer-state attack suite whose decisive evidence exists only across iterations, per...

Chenmin Wu, H. Jia, Yang Liu et al. · 0 citations

SWE-Duel: Towards a Self-Scaling Arena for Coding Agents

Static coding benchmarks are fixed at release. Over time their tasks leak into training data, and stronger agents eventually saturate them. We argue that a benchmark should instead aim to be self-scaling: its tasks and oracles are created at evaluation time, so no content exists in advance to leak, and its difficulty i...

Wei Minn, Zhensu Sun, L. K. Shar et al. · 0 citations
#artificial intelligence Preprint Sep 2026

FIRE: Failure-Informed Runtime Engineering for Reliable Language-Model Agents

Language-model agents often reach a working solution and then fail to consistently deliver it. We study runtime policies: targeted natural-language instructions and action denials applied by the agent harness at states that preceded observed failures, without changing model weights or the user prompt. With this, keepin...

Nikita Agarwal, Nivedit Jain · 1 citation
Preprint Sep 2026

TRACE: Governing Memory Validity in Evolving Multi-Agent Systems

TRACE is presented, a training-free layer that treats re-entry as an eligibility decision rather than a storage or retrieval operation, reconciling a departure checkpoint against absence-period updates, resolving explicit and implicit invalidation, and releasing a bounded Return View only when it covers the returning r...

Wen-Jun Xiong, Shengtao Zhang, Shangding Gu et al. · 0 citations
#artificial intelligence Review Sep 2026

Safety in Self-Evolving Agents: A Survey

SAVER is introduced, a transition-centered framework in which Substrate locates reusable influence, Adaptation captures how it changes, Violation identifies compromised safety attributes, Exposure marks where failures become observable, and Response assesses containment, repair, or revocation.

Jia-Hao Chen, Zhou Feng, Ou-Bo Ma et al. · 1 citation
#artificial intelligence Preprint Sep 2026

When Harnesses Lose the Signal: Causal Evaluation of Recovery in LLM Agents

Large language model agents rely on external harnesses to pass information between the model and its environment and to recover from execution errors. Yet recovery is usually judged only by average task success. This hides an important tension. The same operation can rescue a failing trajectory or disrupt one that woul...

Shu-Yao Xiao, Sheng-Ling Wang, Xuan Chen et al. · 0 citations

Related blog posts

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.