Pavan C Shekar

Pavan C Shekar, Ashwanth Krishnan

We present Adaptive Minds, an agentic system that treats LoRA adapters as domain-specific tools. Instead of relying on a single fine-tuned model or rigid rule-based routing, our approach empowers the base LLM itself to act as a semantic router analyzing each query and dynamically selecting the most relevant LoRA tool. This enables the agent to seamlessly switch between different domain experts on demand. By combining the flexibility of multi-agent orchestration with the efficiency of parameter-efficient fine-tuning, Adaptive Minds delivers accurate, specialized responses while preserving conversational ability. The system is built with LangGraph for workflow management, supports both API and web interfaces, and is fully open source, providing a scalable and extensible foundation for domain-adaptive AI assistance.

Pavan C Shekar, Abhishek H S, Aswanth Krishnan

Large language model (LLM) reasoning is ephemeral: chains of thought vanish with the context window, pruned search branches leave no record, and memory buffers cannot be diffed, merged, or audited. Every other complex software process (code, infrastructure, data, experiments) is version-controlled; reasoning is not. We introduce GitOfThoughts, which stores an agent's reasoning tree as a git repository: every scored thought is a commit, scores are notes, outcomes are tags, and retrieval is "git log" over the agent's own history. This makes reasoning replayable, auditable, and mergeable across agents at near-zero engineering cost. We then ask the harder question: does memory, in any substrate, actually improve accuracy? Across five substrates (none, markdown, vector, graph, git), two benchmarks, two model scales, and pre-registered replications, the answer for novel problems is no. No memory format reliably helps, and a promising early result collapsed under its own pre-registered replication. Memory pays only above what we call the copyability threshold: when the retrieved case is a near-duplicate of the current problem (similarity >~ 0.8), accuracy jumps sharply; below it, nothing. The gain is answer retrieval, not method transfer: a 4.5x larger model doubles the near-duplicate payoff yet still cannot extract a transferable method from a worked example. The only general lever we find is test-time sampling. The case for git-as-substrate is therefore auditability, provenance, and mergeability at accuracy parity. We document a retracted result and a refuted hypothesis to model the evaluation standard we hold ourselves to.

Abhishek HS, Pavan C Shekar, Arpit Jain et al.

Every existing inference-time reasoning framework discards all failure context at problem boundaries, leaving a model solving problem 500 no wiser than it was on problem 1. We present ReTreVal (Reasoning Tree with Validation), a training-free framework that closes this gap through adaptive tree exploration with tool-augmented node refinement, typed-failure backtracking that injects categorized error context into the recovered branch, and a self-rewriting memory that accumulates and revises strategy entries across problems, enabling inference-time cross-problem learning on any fixed, unmodified LLM without fine-tuning. ReTreVal achieves 85.8% pass@1 on MATH-500 (+8.6 pp over Zero-Shot CoT, +8.6 pp over the strongest baseline Self-Refine) and 54.4% on MMLU-Pro (+15.3 pp over Self-Refine), with a 3.4:1 win-to-regression ratio confirming genuine error recovery rather than noise. These capabilities, previously requiring gradient updates, allow a 32B model to compete with much larger single-pass systems.