Skip to content

AIBuildAI-2.5: Efficient Autonomous AI Model Development Through LLM-Guided Tree Search

Sep 2026 · 0 citations · 41 references
Computer Science

Abstract

Autonomous agents that automatically build artificial intelligence (AI) models could broaden access to AI across science and engineering. A popular line of such agents frames model building as a code search problem and solves it by tree search, in which each node is a candidate program and the tree grows by generating a child program from a parent, and these agents now approach the capability of experienced AI engineers on realistic benchmarks. However, these agents have three weaknesses in efficiency that have not been fully addressed. First, only a small number of candidates can be executed within a realistic budget, so search rules that rank nodes by executed rewards, such as Monte Carlo-style tree search, rely on few and noisy scores and select the next node to explore less effectively. Second, no resource-aware strategy is used to schedule training jobs, which can lower hardware utilization and training efficiency. Third, every agent call is served by a single powerful model, which inflates inference cost. Here we introduce AIBuildAI-2.5, an agentic system that carries out the tree search with LLM agents and addresses each of the three issues. AIBuildAI-2.5 proposes a novel LLM-guided tree search, in which a judge scores each candidate on its expected improvement, grounding, and feasibility, and a selector ranks the pool of candidates from these scores and the state of the search. In addition, AIBuildAI-2.5 comprises a scheduler that launches training jobs with the current hardware resource status taken into account and a router that assigns lower-cost LLMs to less demanding tasks while reserving the most capable LLM for the most challenging sub-tasks in the AI model building workflow. AIBuildAI-2.5 ranks first on MLE-Bench with a medal rate of 73.3%, and outperforms a strong baseline on six autonomous AI research tasks from AIRS-Bench.

View source

Similar papers

#computer vision Review Sep 2017

Agile Software Development Methods: Review and Analysis

This publication proposes a definition and a classification of agile software development approaches and analyses ten software development methods that can be characterized as being "agile" against the defined criterion.

P. Abrahamsson, O. Salo, Jussi Ronkainen et al. · 727 citations · ⚡54
#computer vision Open access Jul 2017

What happens when software developers are (un)happy

Consequences of happiness and unhappiness that are beneficial and detrimental for developers' mental well-being, the software development process, and the produced artifacts are found.

D. Graziotin, Fabian Fagerholm, Xiaofeng Wang et al. · 236 citations · ⚡13
#computer vision Open access Oct 2004

Mobile-D: an agile approach for mobile application development

The Mobile-D approach is briefly outlined here and the experiences gained from four case studies are discussed, which helped develop an agile development approach for mobile application development.

P. Abrahamsson, Antti Hanhineva, H. Hulkko et al. · 225 citations · ⚡18
#artificial intelligence Open access May 2023

Evaluating the Performance of Large Language Models on GAOKAO Benchmark

GAOKAO-Bench is introduced, an intuitive benchmark that employs questions from the Chinese GAOKAO examination as test samples, including both subjective and objective questions that contribute a robust evaluation benchmark for future large language models and offers valuable insights into the advantages and limitations...

Xiaotian Zhang, Chun-yan Li, Yi Zong et al. · 216 citations · ⚡17
#computer vision Open access Mar 2014

Happy software developers solve problems better: psychological measurements in empirical software engineering

A study with 42 participants investigates the relationship between the affective states, creativity, and analytical problem-solving skills of software developers and offers support for the claim that happy developers are indeed better problem solvers in terms of their analytical abilities.

D. Graziotin, Xiaofeng Wang, P. Abrahamsson · 216 citations · ⚡13
#machine learning Review Open access Jun 2014

Why Early-Stage Software Startups Fail: A Behavioral Framework

This state-of-practice investigation was performed using a literature review followed by a multiple-case study approach and presents how inconsistency between managerial strategies and execution can lead to failure by means of a behavioral framework.

Carmine Giardino, Xiaofeng Wang, P. Abrahamsson · 175 citations · ⚡19

Related blog posts

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.