Papers › GRASP: Gated Regression-Aware Skill Proposer for Self-Improving LLM Agents
GRASP: Gated Regression-Aware Skill Proposer for Self-Improving LLM Agents
Johannes Moll, Jean-Philippe Corbeil, Jiazhen Pan, Martin Hadamitzky, Daniel Rueckert, Lisa Adams, Keno Bressem
Title, abstract, authors and date from arXiv's metadata (CC0); this paper is not in the Papers with Code archive (frozen 2025-07-28).
LLM agents acting in structured environments fail in operational rather than conversational ways, and reliability depends on procedural knowledge of the environment. Prior self-improvement methods accumulate natural-language guidance without checking that each new item preserves previously correct behavior, so a note that fixes one trajectory can silently regress another. We introduce GRASP (Gated Regression-Aware Skill Proposer), which treats agent improvement as a sequence of edits to a bounded skill library, admitting each candidate only if it produces a net improvement on a balanced held-out probe under a hard regression budget. We evaluate GRASP across five base models on two FHIR-based clinical benchmarks, which score procedural reliability against FHIR state rather than clinical correctness or patient outcomes. On MedAgentBench, GRASP lifts gpt-oss-120b from 40.6% to 88.8%, exceeds the strongest of five self-improvement baselines by 21.0 points, and improves every other base model by 17.2 to 40.3 points. Ablations attribute the gain to comparative proposal generation, the acceptance gate, and the hard regression budget rather than to skill writing itself, which without validation is no better than using no skills. Granting the same acceptance gate to all five baselines lifts each of them in-domain and none of them out of distribution, isolating the gain to the gate applied to a bounded, editable library rather than to held-out validation itself. The mechanism helps in non-clinical environments where tasks recur with verifiable structure and is flat where the action space is open-ended. Frozen libraries transfer across models and across benchmarks that share a tool-calling convention and degrade under interface mismatch.
In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
For agents, Syntology's MCP tool lists every function and class Syntology harvested from this paper and whether it ran (how to connect): get_harvested_code_for_paper(arxiv_id="2605.29668")
Code
Syntology Ran 5 of 5 code samples harvested from 1 repository linked to this paper; 0 have no recorded run. Of those that ran: 5 ran with no contract checked.
By repository: found in paper text by Syntology: 5 samples from 1 repository, 5 ran. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.
Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
5 samples harvested; 5 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 0 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.
Licence: 5 of the 5 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.
Harvested from jomoll/GRASP. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.
Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.
Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.
73f2a116122317a1 · report
7567eaf1573e52ba · report
328148f9967f4226 · report
96381e5a50d67367 · report
c3bbb51947b31df5 · report
Results from the paper
The Papers with Code archive ends with its 2025-07-28 snapshot. This paper's arXiv identifier, 2605.29668, was issued in May 2026, after that date, so the archive has no leaderboard rows for it.
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections