When Should Agents Remember? Falsification-Gated Self-Evolution for LLM Agents
Abstract
Domain fit: AI-adjacent · Paper appears method- or tooling-adjacent to AI workflows with partial ecosystem coverage.
LLM agents increasingly operate in long-horizon, verifier-rich environments, but current self-improvement mechanisms often write episode-derived lessons directly into memory, making local success an unreliable signal for reusable and safe knowledge. This paper addresses the core question of when an experience-derived behavioral update should be admitted into persistent agent state. We propose Falsification-Gated Self-Evolution (FGSE), a verifier-grounded framework that represents each candidate lesson as a structured hypothesis with an explicit precondition, behavior change, expected effect, and verifier. FGSE applies the hypothesis only in a temporary state, tests it on target-transfer, falsification, and archived-regression probes, and then commits, refines, or rejects it according to measured gain and risk. Across web, app, tool-use, and long-term memory benchmarks, FGSE achieves strong task performance, including 39.8 WebArena success rate, 78.8 AppWorld average completion, and 0.724/0.487 Pass$^1$ on $τ$-Retail/$τ$-Airline, while reducing falsification failures to 5.0%, regression damage to 1.3%, and harmful committed updates to 3.6%. These results suggest that testing memory updates as hypotheses supports more reliable long-term adaptation.
Results and benchmarks
LLM agents increasingly operate in long-horizon, verifier-rich environments, but current self-improvement mechanisms often write episode-derived lessons directly into memory, making local success an unreliable signal for reusable and safe knowledge.
Benchmark evidence is limited
Evidence graph: 2 refs, 1 links.
Utility signals: depth 60/100, grounding 58/100, status medium.
Implementation
No direct implementation yet
Maintained implementation evidence is not confirmed for this paper yet.
Use the implementation status and reproduction sections for the current action plan.
No verified maintained repo yet
There is no verified maintained implementation yet. Use this baseline plan to decide whether to prototype now or defer.
- No direct maintained implementation was found. Use the paper PDF and citation graph to design a baseline reproduction.
- Track assumptions and missing details in an experiment log before coding.
Time to first repro: a few days
Recommendation evidence is currently too limited for a maintained-repo choice. Use Implementation Status and Reproduction Path for a practical baseline plan.
- Estimate is based on paper-only reproduction flow
Reproduction readiness
No repo
No verified implementation available
- No maintained repository has been identified for this paper. Check adjacent implementations or HF artifacts below.
Hardware requirements
- Expect multi-day setup/compute for meaningful reproduction based on current guidance.
Validation caveat
Hugging Face artifacts
No trustworthy direct or curated related Hugging Face artifacts were found yet. Use targeted searches to quickly locate candidate models, datasets, and demos.
Tip: start with models, then check datasets and spaces if you need evaluation data or demos.
Research context
Tasks
Agentic tool use
Methods
Transformer
Domains
Large Language Models, AI Agents
Open this paper in HFEPX to review benchmark signals, evaluation modes, and human-feedback protocol context.
Open in HFEPXJump to Paper2Code search queries derived from this paper's research context.