arXiv preprint ·
False Frontiers: Diagnosing and Mitigating Co-Cheating in Self-Evolving Search Agents
- Published
- Source
- arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
- Original
- Read it at arXiv
- Topics
Abstract
Self-evolving search agents build their own training curricula by jointly optimizing a proposer that generates questions and a solver that answers them. This closed loop introduces a failure mode we call co-cheating: the proposer and solver increasingly agree on shared errors, so internal reward improves without a matching gain in external correctness. A post-hoc audit against source evidence shows co-cheating growing more severe over successive rounds of self-evolution, with pseudo-label correctness stagnating or declining even as the in-loop training signal improves. The most direct mitigation is to verify proposals before training: we introduce multi-sample verification (MSV), which queries the same model three times with the source and three times without it to decide task admission and replace unreliable pseudo-labels. MSV partially reduces false agreement but leaves substantial residual co-cheating and costs six extra labeler generations per candidate. These limitations motivate CrossFit, our main method: it partitions the proposer's source documents into groups A and B; questions generated from A are scored by an auxiliary solver trained only on B, and vice versa. The cross-fitted agreement determines proposer reward, so a same-source pseudo-label cannot be reproduced through the feedback solver, while the original solver's update rule is unchanged. Rerunning the loop with Qwen3.5-4B and Qwen3.5-9B, MSV reduces false-agreement mass from 6.1% to 5.7% and from 8.8% to 7.2%, whereas CrossFit reduces it to 3.0% and 3.7%. Replaying identical proposals with source-excluded feedback further reduces false agreement to 0.4% and 0.1%, isolating feedback ancestry from curriculum changes. Across seven downstream search benchmarks, CrossFit improves average performance over standard coupled self-evolution by 8.8 and 8.4 points and over Search-R1 by 8.7 and 7.8 points at 4B and 9B.
The authors’ abstract, as arXiv lists it. arXiv’s listings, abstracts included, are free for anyone to reuse.
Read it on ReadSearch
Each opens after you create an account, and brings you back to this paper.
More in Computation & Language / NLP
MetaSteer: Context-Conditioned, nonlinear Steering via Attention-Projection Adaptation
AuraForge: Scaling Security Supervision for Training Coding Agents
Anchor-ECC: Local Integrity Checking for Watermarked LLM Outputs via Error-Correcting Codes
Child-Adapted Structured Phonological Representations for Interpretable Speech Sound Analysis
Training LLM Judges from Language Feedback via Position-Selective Self-Distillation
Get the few papers worth your time in Computation & Language / NLP every morning.
ReadSearch reads the new papers in your field each day and brings you the few worth reading, each with its key finding in a sentence.