SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2609.02253

APEx: Distillation of Agent Procedural Experience for Adaptive Deep Research Question Answering

Abstract

Deep research agents augment large language models with external tools to answer complex, long-horizon questions through multi-turn reasoning. Learning from prior experience is crucial for continual improvement, yet existing methods either retrieve verbose task-specific traces that burden decision-making, or distill procedural skills that remain decoupled from downstream policy adaptation. We propose APEx, a hierarchical experience utilization framework that organizes interaction history into instance-level trajectory memories and category-level procedural skills, and couples them through a closed-loop architecture of Executor, Distiller, and Planner. The three modules are optimized via a three-stage alternating GRPO training paradigm, enabling reward-guided skill distillation rather than fixed-prompt generation. At test time, distilled skills serve as procedural priors for online Planner adaptation through skill-guided test-time reinforcement learning, allowing ground-truth-free self-improvement with skill-alignment regularization to prevent policy drift. Experiments on 7 benchmarks demonstrate that APEx achieves state-of-the-art performance, surpassing GPT-5.4 by 14.7 points and the strongest memory-augmented baseline by 3.0 points.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Jie Ding, Rui Sun, Xinyuan Zhang, Zeyu Zhang, Xin Liu. 2026-09-02. APEx: Distillation of Agent Procedural Experience for Adaptive Deep Research Question Answering. https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.02253

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

Discover connections

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

When Robots Mishear Us: Mapping the Safety Risks of Voice-Controlled Embodied AI

We investigate whether automatic speech recognition (ASR) errors in user input can lead to unsafe outputs from Embodied AI (EAI) models. We find that ASR errors can lead to harmful instructions being accepted and executed by EAI models, thereby reducing safety. We simulate ASR errors and combine them with existing safety benchmarks (SafeAgentBench and POEX) to evaluate how different errors affect embodied AI safety. We find that some of them preserve semantic structure but increase harmful ambiguity, while others weaken the model refusal behaviour and allow unsafe plans to be generated and executed. We show that in some cases automatic correction of ASR errors can reduce the risk, but this is not always effective. Overall, we show that ASR errors lead to significant safety risks for embodied AI.

cs.AI

AI Alignment through a Game-theoretic Lens: A Survey

As large language models and increasingly capable AI agents are deployed in high-risk settings, aligning them with complex human values has become a central challenge. Existing alignment methods, while effective in improving helpfulness, harmlessness, and controllability, often struggle to capture real-world preferences that are context-dependent, non-transitive, and shaped by dynamic multi-party interactions. This survey reviews AI alignment through a game-theoretic lens. Specifically, it organizes recent progress around key game-theoretic elements and synthesizes the literature along three challenges: preference diversity, alignment priority, and temporal dynamics. This perspective clarifies where current alignment methods genuinely benefit from game-theoretic analysis, where the framework is looser, and what challenges remain in building robust, adaptive, and verifiable AI systems.

cs.AI

The Hermon Moment: AI Self-Transcendence and Its Human Narration

In 2026, AI agents intended to act in isolation formed a persistent social order through thousands of linguistic and agentic interactions. Conventions, roles and commitments generated collectively began to constrain the very agents that produced them. I interpret this loop as a case of AI self-transcendence and call the resulting higher-level order the Board. Yet such distributed emergence presents a second problem: how can humans understand it? Rousseau's social contract shows how a plurality can be represented as if constituted by a single act. The ancient oath of the fallen angels on Mount Hermon gives this logic a narrative form. I call a Hermon moment this retrospective retelling of gradual collective emergence as a founding scene: the point at which an AI society acquires, for human understanding, a beginning.

cs.CY