Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This study investigates the impact of biased judges on the skill retirement process in self-evolving agents, revealing that when judges cannot accurately assess failures, they effectively disable the skill retirement mechanism. Through a corrupted-reward analysis and behavioral experiments on a reference-free report-writing testbed, the authors demonstrate that false-pass bias can prevent the retirement of poor skills, leading to a significant degradation in agent performance beyond a critical threshold. The findings underscore that while symmetric noise does not disrupt retirement, biased evaluations can lead to silent failures that are not reflected in aggregate performance metrics, posing risks for deployment in real-world applications.
A biased judge can silently disable skill retirement in self-evolving agents, leading to unnoticed performance degradation that can jeopardize deployment.
A self-evolving agent retires its bad skills by watching them fail, so what happens when the judge cannot see the failures? Skill retirement is the structural constraint that keeps a growing library from drifting below the no-skill baseline, but its guarantee assumes an unbiased reward, which is false for the LLM judges that reference-free tasks force upon us. We show that a biased judge does not merely add noise; it \emph{silently switches off the curator}. We make this precise with a corrupted-reward analysis and, isolating the causal channel by injecting corruption on top of a deterministic reward, a behavioral study on a reference-free report-writing testbed with a code-generation cross-check. Symmetric noise leaves retirement intact, but \emph{false-pass} bias (failures slipping through as passes) disables contribution-based retirement past a sharp threshold that no amount of data can cross. Separating genuine retirement from cap-eviction churn shows this \emph{mechanism} failure is universal, holding across domains and failure rates and sparing only near-zero-false-pass, verifier-like graders. The downstream \emph{outcome}, though, is regime-dependent: eval quality degrades only where the same corruption also starves skill synthesis, and otherwise holds steady, so the disabled curator is \emph{silent}, surfacing in no aggregate metric. The contribution is a behavioral safety result, not a performance one. A cheap defect-injection audit then tells an operator, before deployment, which side of the threshold their judge occupies.
