PubArx:2026.00009v1 Research article Open for review

GradReason: LLMs as Meta-Learners that Replace Training Epochs with Training-Data-Free Weight Updates

Ali Mohammadi Ruzbahani1, Abbas Yazdinejad2, Hadis Karimipour1
  1. 1University of Calgary
  2. 2University of Regina
Published 8 November 2026

Abstract

Standard training recipes make a fixed number of passes over the training data, even when an epoch mostly adds mini-batch noise. We study whether a large language model (LLM) that reads the weight and gradient history of a run can replace some of these epochs with updates that compute no gradient and read no training image. In GradReason, an LLM agent is called every ten epochs. In a restricted sandbox it analyses recent weight snapshots, epoch-mean gradients and validation metrics, then submits a Python program that computes new weights and a plan marking each of the next ten epochs as data or virtual. A virtual epoch is kept only if it passes a forward-only check on 5,000 held-out validation images. In 120 runs on CIFAR-10 and CIFAR-100 with three architectures, Claude Opus 5.5 used 32.8\% fewer data epochs than the 80-epoch recipe at 0.31 percentage points lower test accuracy (95\% CI $-0.72$ to $+0.09$; 0.94 points on ResNet-18), on the recipe's own frontier of data against accuracy. Unprompted, Opus averaged recent weight snapshots in every run. This choice produced the savings: a fixed rule with the same acceptance check but extrapolations from prior work saved 5.4\% of the data epochs, and the same rule with averaging added saved 25.0\%. The LLM's contribution is to find a working update within a single run; once found, a fixed rule implements it equally well. An Opus run cost 0.68 USD, but at this scale the agent's latency exceeded the GPU time it saved.

Full text

Read the paper on this page (15 pages), or open the PDF on its own.

Open the PDF

Community review

The authors invite signed reviews and endorsements from researchers who sign in with ORCID. Everything here is public and tied to version 1. How this works

0reviews 0endorsements 0comments
Review

A structured, signed review: an overall assessment, a summary and your main concerns.

Sign in to review
Endorse

A short, signed statement that you have read the paper and consider it sound and valuable.

Sign in to endorse

Both are public, signed with your name and ORCID iD, and tied to version 1. You declare that you have no conflict of interest with the paper.

Endorsements 0

No endorsements for this version yet.

Reviews 0

No reviews for this version yet.

Discussion

No comments yet.

Sign in to take part in the discussion.

Sign in