Author: Manasa – Independent AI researcher, building “BLUE”: a concept-stage self-evolving AI system designed with alignment-first principles. This post is part of my ongoing work exploring safe, modular agent evolution. I’m open to collaboration, feedback, and critical discussion.

Introduction
Most current AI systems, including large language models, are deployed as static entities — they do not evolve after training. Despite interacting with millions of users, their behavior, tone, and internal alignment remain fixed, unless offline fine-tuning is manually performed.

This post sketches a conceptual framework for safe, self-evolving AI agents — models that adapt behavior using persistent memory, feedback-aware filters, and context modulation, without altering their core weights. This system does not propose direct online learning or weight updates, but rather a soft evolution through external, modular components.

I argue that such a system may offer promising pathways for both alignment robustness and user-specific personalization, while raising critical safety questions around value drift, adversarial teaching, and feedback loop amplification.

1. The Problem: Static Models in a Dynamic World

We currently deploy LLMs into environments that are:

Rapidly evolving in terms of user expectations and norms.
Context-rich, where subtle history often matters.
Ethically ambiguous, requiring fluid judgment over time.

And yet, most models have no internal memory, no way to learn from users, and no method to refine their ethical alignment post-deployment.

This creates a bottleneck: models must be over-engineered at training time to account for all future scenarios — a task that is both intractable and misaligned with how humans or safe systems evolve.

2. The Case for Controlled Evolution

Instead of retraining, what if an AI system could:

Log meaningful interaction history.
Build a persistent profile of a user or task environment.
Learn which responses lead to positive outcomes, filtered through a safety lens.
Update future outputs in a modular, interpretable way.

This does not require touching the weights, but rather builds on external scaffolding, such as dynamic memory, preference graphs, or evolving prompts and policies.

This form of “lightweight evolution” could allow agents to improve their helpfulness and alignment over time without compromising model integrity.

3. Persistent M

...

Posts

Wikitag Contributions

Comments