# Search over Self-Edit Strategies for LLM Adaptation

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2601.14532 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.14532/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 10 of its 13 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 20 Jan 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 10 of 10)

- [Qwen3 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.09388/) (2025)
- [Model-Agnostic Meta-Learning for Fast Adaptation of Deep Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1703.03400/) (2017)
- [SQuAD: 100,000+ Questions for Machine Comprehension of Text](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1606.05250/) (2016)
- [AlphaEvolve: A coding agent for scientific and algorithmic discovery](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.13131/) (2025)
- [Illuminating search spaces by mapping elites](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1504.04909/) (2015)
- [Darwin Godel Machine: Open-Ended Evolution of Self-Improving Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.22954/) (2025)
- [Beyond Human Data: Scaling Self-Training for Problem-Solving with Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.06585/) (2023)
- [Self-Adapting Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.10943/) (2025)
- [Open-Endedness is Essential for Artificial Superhuman Intelligence](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.04268/) (2024)
- [Huxley-G"odel Machine: Human-Level Coding Agent Development by an Approximation of the Optimal Self-Improving Machine](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.21614/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Many LLM-based open-ended search systems freeze the foundation model that proposes improvements to existing solutions, which may bottleneck long-run progress. Recent work has explored updating the proposal model at test time [arXiv:2511.23473], but the update strategy is still typically hand-specified. Therefore, this study investigated whether an LLM can use task feedback to decide how it should update its weights. For tractability, we focused on the simpler case where there is only one round of self-improvement, and restricted the update operator to self-supervised next token prediction (NTP), leaving the model freedom in choosing its training data and key NTP hyperparameters. Using the Self-Adapting Language Models (SEAL) [arXiv:2506.10943] framework as a testbed, we relaxed its fixed human template constraint and allowed the model to generate its own self-edit templates, thereby giving it more control over its training data and hyperparameters. Two variants were studied, differing in whether template generation was conditioned on a lightweight archive of past templates. In SEAL's Single-Passage Knowledge Incorporation setting with Qwen3-8B on SQuAD [arXiv:1606.05250], the no-archive variant performed comparably to the weaker "Implications" baseline, while the archive variant outperformed "Implications" and approached the strongest human-designed "Rewrite" baseline without surpassing it. Further analysis of collapse in the model's exploration revealed that a naive archive can confer some short-term robustness but can also accelerate homogenization, suggesting that explicit novelty pressure may be required to consistently advance beyond carefully optimized human strategies. Our code is available at https://github.com/cheongalc/search-self-edit-strategies .