arXiv preprint ·
Can LLMs Improve Their Own Harness? A Controlled Study on ARC-AGI-3
- Published
- Source
- arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
- Original
- Read it at arXiv
- Topics
Abstract
A generally intelligent system acquires new skills efficiently without requiring humans to redesign its software scaffold for every new task. Yet language models rarely act alone. A harness is a symbolic program that orchestrates calls to the model, handling perception, memory, tool use, recovery, and inference allocation on the model's behalf. ARC-AGI-3 is an interactive benchmark in which agents must explore unfamiliar environments, figure out their goals on the fly, and keep learning as they go. On it, human-steered systems already report ceiling scores across the public games, so we know effective designs exist. We ask whether frontier models can build and improve such a harness on their own. Through a fixed coding bootstrap, each model constructs a complete task harness, acts through that harness on five development games, and revises the entire codebase twice. Every version is evaluated on twenty games that never influence adaptation. We measure task performance with Relative Human Action Efficiency (RHAE), which combines level completion with action efficiency relative to human baselines, and record dollar-denominated inference cost as a practical resource measure. Across 27 lineages, harness performance ranges from zero to near-ceiling scores. Two revisions raise mean held-out RHAE by only 2.80 points (95% interval [-1.44,7.35]). Development gains overstate held-out improvement, and reductions in inference cost can come at the expense of task performance. Human-steered systems demonstrate further headroom. These findings reveal a gap between autonomous harness construction and reliable adaptation under this two-revision protocol: even strong task performance does not ensure that subsequent revisions generalize or preserve existing capabilities.
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 Artificial Intelligence
VeriEvolve: Evaluator-First Evolution for Tool-Using Agents
Stale Instruction Files Override the Code in Coding Agents: A One-Sentence Fix
Symmetry-Oriented Testing Framework for Variational Quantum Algorithms
Governance-State Corruption in Long-Term Memory for LLM Agents: A Cross-Model Stress Test
VeeReview: Measuring Build-Verify Pairs in Agent-Authored Pull Requests from a V-Model Perspective
Get the few papers worth your time in Artificial Intelligence 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.