Flex-RSI: Benchmarking Recursive Self-Improvement of Frontier Agents

The Flex-RSI Team, led by Jingdong Zhang and Jionghao Wang with authors from Texas A&M, Cambridge, NUS, NVIDIA, MIT, CMU and other institutions, introduces a benchmark that tests whether agents can improve their own harness, not only their answer, on vision and robotics tasks under a fixed budget.
Ask this paper
Protocol. In each round an executor improves the task solution, which is kept only if it scores higher on held-out validation data. An improver then revises the harness, including the executor and itself. Every run starts from the same general-purpose harness, and final solutions are scored on hidden test data.
Coverage. Tasks span perception, reasoning, robot action, 3D reconstruction, visual creation and infrastructure. 18 models are evaluated, 11 of them closed-source, including Claude Opus 5.5, GPT-6 Astra and Gemini 4 Argon.
Findings. Self-improvement helps most when the agent builds its own solution. Feedback that records only success or failure holds back open-weight models.
Gap. Open-weight models fall furthest behind where outputs must pass strict checks of physical stability or exact correctness.
Ablation. Paired runs show that editing the harness itself contributes to the gains, beyond iterating on the solution.
Abstract
Frontier language models are increasingly deployed as agents, and how well an agent performs depends not only on its model but also on its harness: the prompts, tools, memory, and control loop through which the model acts. When an agent is applied to a new problem, a natural question is whether it can use the feedback of the task to improve the way it works, and not merely its answer. Most existing benchmarks keep the agent's harness fixed and score the solution it produces, or target large-scale model training. We introduce Flex-RSI, a benchmark for the recursive self-improvement of agents on vision and robotics tasks under a fixed budget. In each round, an executor improves the task solution, which is kept only if it scores higher on held-out validation data, and an improver then revises the harness, including the executor and itself. Every run starts from the same general-purpose harness, and the final solution is scored on hidden test data. Evaluating closed-source and open-weight models on tasks spanning perception, reasoning, robot action, 3D reconstruction, visual creation, and infrastructure, we find that self-improvement helps most when the agent builds its own solution, that feedback recording only success or failure holds back open-weight models, and that open-weight models fall furthest behind where outputs must pass strict checks of physical stability or exact correctness. Paired runs further show that editing the harness itself contributes to the gains.