arXiv preprint ·
Trustworthy Recursive Self-Improvement in the Era of Large Models: Foundation, Risks, Evaluation and Open Challenges
- Published
- Source
- arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
- Original
- Read it at arXiv
- Topics
Abstract
AI systems built around large models increasingly use experience and feedback to make persistent changes to models, prompts, memories, tools, and workflows. Recursive self-improvement (RSI) extends this process to inductive biases and to the mechanisms that govern future updates, which can themselves be revised and reused across improvement cycles. Yet self-modification alone does not guarantee trustworthy improvement. Reported gains may reflect flawed evaluations, previously acquired capabilities may deteriorate, and compliance with behavioral constraints may weaken. Compromised artifacts or sensitive information may also persist in successor systems. Changes to improvement mechanisms may invalidate earlier verification results and make human oversight less effective. This survey presents an operational definition and process framework for RSI and organizes the requirements for trustworthy RSI into four interconnected themes: genuine and sustained improvement; behavioral constraints, alignment, and fairness; system security and privacy; and transparency and controllability. We examine these themes from three perspectives: Improvement Validity, Constraint Preservation, and Effective Oversight. This analysis covers improvement diagnosis, proposal generation, proposal evaluation, and update implementation (S1--S4), including the recursive application of these stages to improvement mechanisms (RI). We review risks, safeguards, and evaluation evidence for individual updates, effects inherited by successor systems, and revisions to improvement mechanisms, while distinguishing direct RSI findings from evidence in related systems. Finally, we examine evaluation settings, identify requirements for independent and longitudinal assessment, and discuss applications and open research problems.
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
From Speech Tokens to Stolen Voices: Attacker-Chosen-Text Speaker Impersonation via Representation Inversion
What Victims Take Away: Attack Reuse and Defense Revision after Prompt-Injection Attacks
Scope-Gap Injection: Exploiting Evaluator Channel Blind Spots in the OpenClaw Agent Security Competition
No Tokenizer, Still a Gap: Cross-Lingual Fairness of Homoglyph and Invisible-Character Watermarking
Attack logics, not outputs: Concept-based Property Attacks for Shortcut Elimination in Neural Networks
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.