DeltaEvolve: Momentum-Driven Evolutionary Code Optimization

This skill enables Claude to iteratively evolve code solutions toward optimal performance using the DeltaEvolve framework. Instead of tracking full code snapshots between iterations (as in AlphaEvolve/FunSearch), DeltaEvolve captures structured semantic deltas -- concise descriptions of what changed and why -- between successive program versions. These deltas accumulate into a momentum vector that steers the LLM toward productive search directions while consuming ~37% fewer tokens than full-code approaches. The technique applies to any problem where a candidate program can be scored by an evaluator: heuristic design, symbolic regression, optimization solvers, algorithm discovery, and more.

When to Use

• When the user asks to iteratively improve a function or algorithm by trying variations and keeping what works (e.g., "evolve a better priority function for this scheduler")
• When the user wants to discover heuristics for combinatorial problems like bin packing, graph coloring, or scheduling
• When the user has a scoring/evaluation function and wants to search for the best candidate program that maximizes it
• When the user asks to optimize a numerical solver, PDE discretization, or regression formula through evolutionary search
• When the user wants to automatically explore algorithm design space rather than manually tuning code
• When the user mentions "FunSearch", "AlphaEvolve", or "LLM-driven evolution" and wants a structured approach

Key Technique

DeltaEvolve formalizes LLM-driven evolution as an Expectation-Maximization loop. In the E-step, the LLM samples candidate programs by applying delta-based modifications to a parent solution. In the M-step, the system evaluates candidates, updates a database of scored deltas, and selects context for the next iteration. The critical insight is that the optimizable context -- what the LLM sees in its prompt -- matters far more than scalar fitness scores. Ablation studies show that removing numerical scores barely hurts performance, but random context selection causes collapse. This means the system works primarily through in-context learning from well-chosen examples, not regression on scores.

The core innovation is replacing full-code histories with a three-level delta representation. Level 1 is a one-line summary ("FROM: greedy-by-weight TO: greedy-by-density-with-lookahead", ~30 tokens). Level 2 is a structured delta plan listing each modified component with old logic, new logic, and the hypothesis behind the change. Level 3 is the full executable code. A progressive disclosure mechanism feeds older iterations as Level-1 summaries ("ancient history"), recent iterations as Level-2 plans ("recent insights"), and only the parent node as Level-3 full code ("immediate context"). This mirrors how momentum in SGD accumulates gradient differences (x_i - x_{i-1}): the semantic deltas capture program differences (p_i - p_{i-1}) and their accumulated trajectory encodes the prevailing direction of improvement.