Universe Routing: Why Self-Evolving Agents Need Epistemic Control

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2603.14799v1
• Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2026 03:58:14 GMT
• Title: Universe Routing: Why Self-Evolving Agents Need Epistemic Control
• Abstract summary: A critical failure mode of current lifelong agents is not lack of knowledge, but the inability to decide how to reason.<n>We formalize this as the universe routing problem: classifying questions into mutually exclusive belief spaces before invoking specialized solvers.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: A critical failure mode of current lifelong agents is not lack of knowledge, but the inability to decide how to reason. When an agent encounters "Is this coin fair?" it must recognize whether to invoke frequentist hypothesis testing or Bayesian posterior inference - frameworks that are epistemologically incompatible. Mixing them produces not minor errors, but structural failures that propagate across decision chains. We formalize this as the universe routing problem: classifying questions into mutually exclusive belief spaces before invoking specialized solvers. Our key findings challenge conventional assumptions: (1) hard routing to heterogeneous solvers matches soft MoE accuracy while being 7x faster because epistemically incompatible frameworks cannot be meaningfully averaged; (2) a 465M-parameter router achieves a 2.3x smaller generalization gap than keyword-matching baselines, indicating semantic rather than surface-level reasoning; (3) when expanding to new belief spaces, rehearsal-based continual learning achieves zero forgetting, outperforming EWC by 75 percentage points, suggesting that modular epistemic architectures are fundamentally more amenable to lifelong learning than regularization-based approaches. These results point toward a broader architectural principle: reliable self-evolving agents may require an explicit epistemic control layer that governs reasoning framework selection.

Related papers

• R-APS: Compositional Reasoning and In-Context Meta-Learning for Constrained Design via Reflective Adversarial Pareto Search [18.8323743697237]
  Large language models (LLMs) are fluent on open-ended tasks, yet in agentic settings, fluency does not ensure reliable delivery.<n>We trace this gap to three coupled structural failures: errors propagate without localization, worst-case perturbations go unevaluated, and accumulated knowledge is never invalidated.<n>We argue these share a root cause: abductive, counterfactual, meta-inductive, corrective, and inductive reasoning pull a shared context in incompatible directions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-03T12:45:39Z)
• Deep Reasoning in General Purpose Agents via Structured Meta-Cognition [58.185853639335896]
  We introduce an inference-time approach for constructing task-specific scaffolds through structured meta-reasoning.<n>We instantiate this approach in a general-purpose agent that distributes complex tasks across more controlled reasoning threads.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-12T01:21:37Z)
• Separable Pathways for Causal Reasoning: How Architectural Scaffolding Enables Hypothesis-Space Restructuring in LLM Agents [0.0]
  We extend the blicket detector paradigm from developmental science to test capacity in AI agents equipped with architectural scaffolding that targets hypothesis-space restructuring.<n>Our compositional architecture has two discrete components: context graphs, which structure exploration as typed state machines, and dynamic behaviors, which monitor for evidence that the current hypothesis space is inadequate and expand it at runtime.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-21T22:49:17Z)
• Reforming the Mechanism: Editing Reasoning Patterns in LLMs with Circuit Reshaping [51.33479921152361]
  Large language models (LLMs) often exhibit flawed reasoning ability that undermines reliability.<n>Existing approaches to improving reasoning typically treat it as a general and monolithic skill, applying broad training which is inefficient and unable to target specific reasoning errors.<n>We introduce Reasoning Editing, a paradigm for selectively modifying specific reasoning patterns in LLMs while preserving other reasoning pathways.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-06T22:51:39Z)
• FormalJudge: A Neuro-Symbolic Paradigm for Agentic Oversight [21.731032636844237]
  This paper proposes a neuro-symbolic framework that employs a bidirectional Formal-of-Thought architecture.<n>We validate across three benchmarks spanning behavioral safety, multi-domain constraint adherence, and agentic upward deception detection.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-11T18:48:11Z)
• Agentic Uncertainty Quantification [76.94013626702183]
  We propose a unified Dual-Process Agentic UQ (AUQ) framework that transforms verbalized uncertainty into active, bi-directional control signals.<n>Our architecture comprises two complementary mechanisms: System 1 (Uncertainty-Aware Memory, UAM), which implicitly propagates verbalized confidence and semantic explanations to prevent blind decision-making; and System 2 (Uncertainty-Aware Reflection, UAR), which utilizes these explanations as rational cues to trigger targeted inference-time resolution only when necessary.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-22T07:16:26Z)
• CoG: Controllable Graph Reasoning via Relational Blueprints and Failure-Aware Refinement over Knowledge Graphs [53.199517625701475]
  CoG is a training-free framework inspired by Dual-Process Theory that mimics the interplay between intuition and deliberation.<n>CoG significantly outperforms state-of-the-art approaches in both accuracy and efficiency.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-16T07:27:40Z)
• Consistency Is Not Always Correct: Towards Understanding the Role of Exploration in Post-Training Reasoning [75.79451512757844]
  Foundation models exhibit broad knowledge but limited task-specific reasoning.<n> RLVR and inference scaling motivate post-training strategies such as RLVR and inference scaling.<n>We show that RLVR induces a squeezing effect, reducing reasoning entropy and forgetting some correct paths.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-10T18:25:26Z)
• Towards Error Centric Intelligence I, Beyond Observational Learning [0.0]
  We argue that progress toward AGI is theory limited rather than data or scale limited.<n>We begin by laying foundations, definitions of knowledge, learning, intelligence, counterfactual competence and AGI.<n>We recast the problem as three questions about how explicit and implicit errors evolve under an agent's actions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-16T20:33:55Z)
• Hallucination Detection via Internal States and Structured Reasoning Consistency in Large Language Models [7.18947815679122]
  Internal State Probing and Chain-of-Thought Verification are used to detect hallucinations in large language models.<n>We develop a unified framework that bridges the gap between the two methods.<n>Our framework consistently and significantly outperforms strong baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-13T15:31:21Z)
• Eigen-1: Adaptive Multi-Agent Refinement with Monitor-Based RAG for Scientific Reasoning [53.45095336430027]
  We develop a unified framework that combines implicit retrieval and structured collaboration.<n>On Humanity's Last Exam (HLE) Bio/Chem Gold, our framework achieves 48.3% accuracy.<n>Results on SuperGPQA and TRQA confirm robustness across domains.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-25T14:05:55Z)
• Deliberative Reasoning Network: An Uncertainty-Driven Paradigm for Belief-Tracked Inference with Pretrained Language Models [7.095344389368656]
  Deliberative Reasoning Network (DRN) is a novel paradigm that reframes logical reasoning from probability to uncertainty minimization.<n>DRN achieves intrinsic interpretability by explicitly tracking belief states and quantifying uncertainty for competing hypotheses.<n>We position DRN as a foundational, verifiable System 2 reasoning component for building more trustworthy AI systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-06T11:33:35Z)
• When Disagreements Elicit Robustness: Investigating Self-Repair Capabilities under LLM Multi-Agent Disagreements [56.29265568399648]
  We argue that disagreements prevent premature consensus and expand the explored solution space.<n>Disagreements on task-critical steps can derail collaboration depending on the topology of solution paths.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-21T02:24:43Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.