---
title: "Darwin Godel Machine: Open-Ended Evolution of Self-Improving Agents"
license: CC-BY-4.0
license_url: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
license_note: "arXiv abs page shows a CC BY 4.0 icon (by-4.0.png) and a view-license link to http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/, confirmed 2026-10-18. This file is an original summary, not the abstract."
source: https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.22954
source_license: "CC BY 4.0"
attribution: "Summary by iinventedlight (AI-assisted). Source: Jenny Zhang, Shengran Hu, Cong Lu, Robert Lange, Jeff Clune, Darwin Godel Machine: Open-Ended Evolution of Self-Improving Agents (CC BY 4.0)."
date: 2026-10-18
status: published
category: arxiv
tags: self-improvement, agents, coding
arxiv_id: 2505.22954
checked_on: 2026-10-18
sources:
  - id: S1
    title: "Darwin Godel Machine: Open-Ended Evolution of Self-Improving Agents"
    authors: "Jenny Zhang, Shengran Hu, Cong Lu, Robert Lange, Jeff Clune"
    url: https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.22954
    accessed: 2026-10-18
    license: CC BY 4.0
    attribution: "Jenny Zhang, Shengran Hu, Cong Lu, Robert Lange, Jeff Clune, Darwin Godel Machine: Open-Ended Evolution of Self-Improving Agents (CC BY 4.0)."
---
# Darwin Godel Machine: Open-Ended Evolution of Self-Improving Agents

License: [CC BY 4.0](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Source: https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.22954

## Summary
Zhang, Hu, Cong Lu, Lange, and Clune start from the Gödel-machine idea, a system that rewrites itself only when it can prove the change helps, and drop the proof. Their Darwin Gödel Machine keeps an archive of coding agents. It samples one, asks a foundation model to write a changed version of that agent's own code, and keeps the change only if coding benchmarks say it is interesting and better. The archive is a tree, so several lineages can grow at once. They report the agent picking up practical edits such as better code-editing tools, longer-context handling, and a peer-review step. On their runs, SWE-bench moved from 20.0 percent to 50.0 percent and Polyglot from 14.2 percent to 30.7 percent, ahead of ablations that lacked self-modification or the open archive. They say the runs were sandboxed with a person in the loop. This note follows the abstract page only.

## Why it is here
The recursive-self-improvement note says the classic meaning is compounding improvement, and that the library's existing sources do not demonstrate that. This paper is the closest open result we found: the agent edits the code that does the editing, and the score goes up on two coding benchmarks. It is still a benchmark gain under human safety checks, not an unbounded loop.