An Architecture for Long-Horizon Agents: Levels, Ticks and Cascaded Intelligence

Note: body below is original English text extracted from arXiv abs / HTML. Do not treat this file as a translation.

arXiv:2609.19519 · published 2026-09-17 · submitted 17 Sep 2026

Abstract

Language-model agents are increasingly asked to carry out work spanning days or weeks, such as an operations remediation or a research programme. Such a task outlives any context window, any process and any interval at which a person can attend. In this paper, we argue that a long-horizon agent must run continually without forgetting before it can learn continually. This ability lies in the harness around the model rather than in the model itself. We derive seven bottlenecks from the long-horizon setting and answer them with a hierarchical architecture of three parts: (i) levels indexed by time scale, each keeping a bounded file summarising the level below; (ii) a clocked tick as the unit of autonomous action; and (iii) cascaded intelligence, where work is escalated to a more capable model only after failing review. We report on a ten-day campaign in which an agent built on this architecture reproduced a published reinforcement-learning result with a human attending once a day, and show (1) the agent kept the thread across every context reset and session boundary of the campaign, (2) operating knowledge written early changed later behaviour with no change to model weights, and (3) where learned components would enter such a system. Overall, our experience suggests continual learning for these agents needs a substrate outliving every context and process, and the checks the harness already runs are where a learner belongs.

Authors

Erik Nijkamp, Anurag Koul, Egor Pakhomov, Bo Pang

Key claims (verbatim-leaning English extract)

• Language-model agents are increasingly asked to carry out work spanning days or weeks, such as an operations remediation or a research programme. Such a task outlives any context window, any process and any interval at which a person can attend. In this paper, we argue that a long-horizon agent must run continually without forgetting before it can learn continually. This ability lies in the harness around the model rather than in the model itself. We derive seven bottlenecks from the long-horizon setting and answer them with a hierarchical architecture of three parts: (i) levels indexed by time scale, each keeping a bounded file summarising the level below; (ii) a clocked tick as the unit of autonomous action; and (iii) cascaded intelligence, where work is escalated to a more capable model only after failing review. We report on a ten-day campaign in which an agent built on this architecture reproduced a published reinforcement-learning result with a human attending once a day, and show (1) the agent kept the thread across every context reset and session boundary of the campaign, (2) operating knowledge written early changed later behaviour with no change to model weights, and (3) where learned components would enter such a system. Overall, our experience suggests continual learning for these agents needs a substrate outliving every context and process, and the checks the harness already runs are where a learner belongs.

• Continual learning for long-horizon agents rests on a prior property: continual operation without forgetting, which belongs to the harness rather than the model.

• Seven bottlenecks are derived from the premise that an agent outlives any context, process, or interval of human attention.

• Architecture uses four abstractions—level, tick, protocol, tier—with levels indexed by time scale, each keeping a bounded file summarising the level below; a clocked tick as the unit of autonomous action; and cascaded intelligence that escalates to a more capable model only after failing review.

• A ten-day campaign reproduced a published RL result with a human attending about once a day: over two hundred ticks and about two dozen escalations; operating knowledge written early changed later behaviour with no change to model weights.

• Levels, Ticks and Cascaded Intelligence # An Architecture for Long-Horizon Agents: Levels, Ticks and Cascaded Intelligence

• Language-model agents now carry out multi-step work in software engineering, research and operations (Yao et al., 2022; Wang et al., 2025), and the horizon they can sustain has grown from minutes to hours in two years (Kwa et al., 2025; Wijk et al., 2024). Deployed agents nonetheless act within an episode: one context window, then a stop, with initiative, memory between episodes and the next start left to the person who asked. Enterprise work does not have this shape: an operations remediation outlives the shift that opened it, a compliance investigation runs for a week, a research programme for months. Longer contexts and better models push the episode boundary outward but do not remove it:

• Prior work answers parts of this problem. Memory architectures decide what an agent remembers across sessions (Packer et al., 2023; Park et al., 2023; Hu et al., 2025); hierarchical agents decompose a long task into sub-goals (Sutton et al., 1999; Jin et al., 2026); model cascades route work to a stronger model by the cost of being wrong (Fanconi and van der Schaar, 2025; Bouchard, 2026); and autonomous research agents run whole campaigns end to end (Lu et al., 2024; Gaddipati et al., 2026). Each lives inside one context or process; durable execution (Candea and Fox, 2003) outlasts the process but has no notion of what to keep. None says what must survive when context, process and attention

• In this paper, we take the position that continual learning for long-horizon agents rests on a prior property: continual operation without forgetting. This property belongs to the harness, the system around the model that decides when it runs, what it reads and what it may do. Studies of agent failures (Cemri et al., 2025; Raj et al., 2026) trace much of what goes wrong to this layer, not the model. From one premise, that an agent outlives any context, process or interval of human attention, we derive seven bottlenecks and present a hierarchical architecture answering them. An agent built on this architecture ran for ten days and reproduced a published result (Hou et al., 2026); it updated n

• Architecture — four abstractions (level, tick, protocol, tier) that answer the bottlenecks and yield operation without forgetting, accumulation, and the points where a learner enters (§3, §5).

Structure (section headings from HTML)

• An Architecture for Long-Horizon Agents: Levels, Ticks and Cascaded Intelligence
• 1 Introduction: Agents Beyond the Episode
• 2 Setting: From One Premise to Seven Bottlenecks
• Two axes.
• Thresholds.
• Correctness and cost.
• Seven bottlenecks.
• 3 Architecture: Levels, Ticks, Protocols and Tiers
• 3.1 Four Abstractions and Their Relations
• 3.2 Seven Mechanism Families
• Autonomy.
• Horizon.
• State.
• Delegation.
• Correctness.
• Resilience.
• Cost.
• 3.3 Operation Without Forgetting, and Accumulation
• 4 Experience: Ten Autonomous Days on One Hard Task
• The task.
• The campaign.
• Three vignettes.
• 5 Position: A Substrate Before a Learner
• References
• Appendix A The Campaign in Numbers, and the Seven Bottlenecks

Remainder

Full original English text: see html_url / source_url / pdf_url in frontmatter.