If the weights never change, is it really recursive self-improvement?

Reddit r/LocalLLaMA Papers

Summary

The article questions whether a system with persistent memory but fixed model weights, like AQuA, qualifies as recursive self-improvement, referencing a paper that uses a narrower definition.

https://preview.redd.it/e0ydm43a55kh1.png?width=2902&format=png&auto=webp&s=8c9b88ff5e4157811e8996ba5a1e96cc55c8ae6a This paper is using a much narrower definition of recursive self-improvement than the phrase usually suggests. AQuA stores validated evidence in a persistent research state that shapes later hypotheses. The underlying language model and evaluator remain fixed. I still find the narrower claim interesting, even if it sits closer to memory-augmented research automation than to a model rewriting itself. The paper does not establish any weight-level capability gain. Is persistent memory that improves later research decisions enough to call a system RSI, or should the term require changes to the system’s underlying capabilities?
Original Article

Similar Articles

Recursive Criticality of AI Self-Improvement

arXiv cs.AI

The paper introduces a model for recursive AI self-improvement, defining a recursive reproduction number to determine when incremental improvements in AI research become self-amplifying or dampening across development cycles.

The Economics of Recursive Self-Improvement [pdf]

Hacker News Top

This paper examines the economic incentives and dynamics of recursive self-improvement in AI systems, addressing how such processes could scale and their implications for governance and safety.