Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2608.27287

Astar: Learning to Propose Evolution Directions for Self-Evolving Industrial AI Systems

Abstract

Modern AI systems advance through continuous iteration: a loop of proposing evolution directions, implementing code, training, and evaluation. While the latter three stages are increasingly automated, the starting point --- proposing effective evolution directions --- remains a critical bottleneck that still relies heavily on senior experts. In this work, we explore whether AI can take over this role. We find that general-purpose LLMs, even the advanced GPT-5.5, offer only generic and misaligned suggestions: the required expertise is accumulated through experience rather than explicitly codified, and thus hard to inject directly. To this end, we propose Astar, a training-based approach that learns a specialized evolution-guiding model from the abundant iteration histories of industrial systems. Realizing this idea, however, raises four challenges: sparse supervision, noisy data, a vast direction space, and prohibitively expensive verification. We address them along two fronts. On the data side, we design a pipeline that turns noisy historical commits into a large, clean evolutionary corpus via pairwise sample expansion and noise filtering. On the model side, we train the model through mid-training, SFT, and RL, guiding evolution direction generation with hierarchical hints and using the reward model in RL as a fast surrogate evaluator. Astar has been deployed in Alibaba's Lazada advertising system for evolution direction proposal. Astar-8B achieves a single-proposal success rate of 0.6786 in real-execution evaluation, far exceeding human experts (0.3229) and the strongest general-purpose LLM (0.3071). More importantly, Astar closes the loop and enables fully automatic iteration: it guided 20 consecutive iterations over two weeks, improving offline Hitrate@200 by 23.6%, while an online A/B test yielded relative lifts of 4.86% in GMV and 1.82% in advertising revenue.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Jinxin Hu, Hao Deng, Haibo Xing, Lingyu Mu, Muyu Zou, Weiqin Yang, Sirui Chen, Bohao Wang, Zhezheng Hao, Hao Zhang, Zulong Chen, Shizhun Wang, Yu Zhang, Xiaoyi Zeng, Jiawei Chen. 2026-08-27. Astar: Learning to Propose Evolution Directions for Self-Evolving Industrial AI Systems. https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.27287

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

WebArxiv: A Reproducible Benchmark for Evaluating Multimodal Web Agents on arXiv Tasks

Foundation models now enable autonomous agents to interact with real-world websites, but existing benchmarks emphasize general-purpose browsing, underrepresent research-oriented environments and scholarly discovery workflows, and often depend on live sites whose changing content and structure undermine reproducibility. arXiv provides a realistic, reproducible, hierarchically structured, information-centric testbed without privacy-sensitive interactions. We introduce WebArxiv, a static-snapshot benchmark comprising 510 time-invariant tasks, each with a unique deterministic ground truth. Its diverse, realistic scholarly tasks go beyond simple information lookup and rule following to emphasize multi-constraint paper retrieval, fine-grained content extraction, and cross-paper comparison. Evaluations of a range of foundation-model-based web agents show that WebArxiv remains challenging. Behavioral analysis reveals that agents over-rely on fixed interaction histories, causing incomplete or repetitive reasoning. We therefore equip agents with a lightweight dynamic-memory mechanism for adaptive retrieval and reasoning over relevant context. The benchmark and code are available at https://anonymous.4open.science/r/74E4423BVNW/README.md.

cs.IR

GreekBarRetrieval: A Benchmark for Greek Statutory Retrieval

Statutory retrieval is necessary for citation-grounded legal question answering, but remains underexplored for Greek. We introduce GreekBarRetrieval, a public retrieval benchmark derived from, and complementing GreekBarBench, which did not include retrieval. The new benchmark comprises 283 bar-exam questions, each accompanied by the facts of the case it refers to, and 6,308 candidate statutory articles to retrieve from. Questions and facts are stated in everyday language, but need to be mapped to the formal terminology of statutes and their abstract legal concepts. A further complication is that not all of the case facts are relevant to each question of a case. Experimenting with three BM25 variants and nine dense retrievers, we find that vanilla dense retrieval far outperforms vanilla sparse retrieval in Recall@100. However, LLM-based query reformulation helps BM25 close that gap, while also improving dense retrieval. With a ten-round ReAct-like LLM reformulation loop that we introduce, BM25 improves further in Recall@100 and obtains the best nDCG and MAP scores of all tested retrievers. Query reformulation also outperforms pseudo-relevance feedback, sparse-dense fusion, and English translation.

cs.IR

Parameterized Dense-Sparse Fusion for Hybrid Retrieval: Tuning a Rank-Score Mix on BEIR SciFact with Qdrant

We study a parameterized hybrid ranker that fuses a dense embedding list and a sparse lexical list. The method has a small, explicit parameter vector: a dense prior $α\in [0,1]$, a score-versus-rank mix $λ\in [0,1]$, an RRF smoothing parameter $κ> 0$, optional list-geometry coefficients that move $α$ per query, and a router margin $τ$ that can turn sparse search off. We grid-search those ranges on SciFact train (809 queries) and freeze the chosen values on SciFact test (300). The tuned rank-score mix ($α= 0.8$, $λ= 0.75$, $κ= 20$) reaches 0.753 nDCG@10 and 0.889 recall@10, outperforming dense BGE (0.742 / 0.871) and equal-weight RRF (0.707 nDCG@10) on that test split. A list-conditioned $α$ adds +0.0006 nDCG; a sparse-off router is rejected by the same train split (any $τ$ that skipped approximately 50% of queries lost nDCG). These coefficients are dataset-specific. Equal RRF with the same models does not beat dense on a nine-zip BEIR macro-average (0.479 vs. 0.519 nDCG@10). Repeating the same train-then-freeze sweep independently on all 20 indexed units beats equal RRF on 20/20 and dense on 16/20 (unit-mean nDCG@10 0.467 vs. 0.462 dense vs. 0.420 RRF). Other corpora should reuse the ranges, not a copy of the SciFact point.

cs.IR