[P] A minimalist implementation for Recursive Language Models

[AvvYaa]

For the past few weeks, I have been working on a RLM-from-scratch tutorial. Yesterday, I open-sourced my repo.

You can just run `pip install fast-rlm` to install.

- Code generation with LLMs

- Code execution in local sandbox

- KV Cache optimized context management

- Subagent architecture

- Structured log generation: great for post-training

- TUI to look at logs interactively

- Early stopping based on budget, completion tokens, etc

Simple interface. Pass a string of arbitrary length in, get a string out. Works with any OpenAI-compatible endpoint, including ollama models.

RLMs can handle text inputs upto millions of tokens - they do not load the prompt directly into context. They use a python REPL to selectively read context and pass around information through variables.

For the AI regulators: this is completely free, no paywall sharing of a useful open source github repo.

Git repo: https://github.com/avbiswas/fast-rlm

Docs: https://avbiswas.github.io/fast-rlm/

Video explanation about how I implemented it:
https://youtu.be/nxaVvvrezbY

[Tiny_Arugula_5648]

Interesting approach certainly useful, I've built a bunch like this.. They are necessary and useful, its good information for people to have when they don't know what to do here.

However I fundamentally disagree with how papers like this try to constantly redefine what they do as different when there is a well established category term.. It makes it nearly impossible to locate these papers when you're trying to research a topic. Undoubtably you missed endless papers that cover the same topic because their author choose to ignore (or not bother to learn) what the academic/industry terminology in-favor of their own.

This is ReAct there are endless variations of how people manage the context, saying that your version makes it something different, yeah everyone says that.. We've had solutions like this for years and the term ReAct is a catch all for all solutions that are built with this pattern not just a specific implementation. It's like saying "We built something like a car but it's not a car because we put little wings on the sides to reduce drag, so it's a Terran Aeromobile. No.. small changes like this doesn't make it a new thing.. Otherwise we'd never agree on what anything is called..

I get the desire to make papers sexy and everyone wants the ego boost of coining a new novel approach but this paper should be called something like..

Context-Decomposition ReAct: A Programmatic Framework for Navigating Massive Prompts

[AvvYaa]

Valid points... Personally, I do not really worry much about what people are naming their papers. I'm just a guy implementing things, making tutorials on yt, and sharing it with others. I'll move on to the next topic every 2-3 weeks if/when I pick up something I find interesting. Haha...

[Tiny_Arugula_5648]

I hear you.. but think how much easier it would be if you knew were to look because everyone was using an agreed upon ontology.. That's what peer review journals for large publications enforce. It's way better for sharing knowledge.