← All speakers

Ryan Marten is an AI researcher and engineer at the Laude Institute developing the training data, benchmarks, and infrastructure behind more capable reasoning models and autonomous agents. A former founding engineer at Bespoke Labs, he has helped lead OpenThoughts and Terminal-Bench and contributed to Harbor and OpenThoughts-Agent.

Marten studied computer science at the University of Toronto and earned a master’s in computer science from the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, where he worked with Derek Hoiem and received a Siebel Scholarship. His research experience includes the Vector Institute, Oxford’s Torr Vision Group, and the Allen Institute for Artificial Intelligence. At AI2, he contributed to DataComp, which examined how dataset choices affect multimodal models, and coauthored Unified-IO 2, which integrated images, language, audio, and actions.

At Bespoke Labs, Marten helped coordinate OpenThoughts, contributing to training, data generation, evaluation, and experimentation. More than 1,000 controlled experiments informed OpenThoughts3, a 1.2-million-example open reasoning dataset, and OpenThinker3, a seven-billion-parameter model evaluated across mathematics, coding, and science.

His most distinctive contributions and technical positions include:

  • Data recipes over raw scale. Strong reasoning datasets depend on question sourcing, selective filtering, teacher selection, and repeated evaluation. Synthetic questions can outperform weaker human-generated material; difficulty labels help identify valuable coding problems, while response length provides a stronger signal for mathematics and science.
  • Better models are not always better teachers. In OpenThoughts experiments, QwQ-32B produced more effective training data than DeepSeek-R1 despite the latter’s stronger benchmark performance. Sampling multiple reasoning traces per question also increased useful training data without requiring proportionally more distinct problems.
  • Supervised fine-tuning can teach reasoning. Training on detailed reasoning traces gives smaller models a practical complement to reinforcement learning. In a legal-reasoning experiment described in his OpenThoughts presentation, a specialized seven-billion-parameter model surpassed its larger teacher after training on verified examples.
  • Realistic environments make agent progress measurable. Marten coauthored Terminal-Bench, which evaluates agents on command-line tasks using executable environments and verification tests, and joined the Terminal-Bench 3 project leadership. He has also contributed to Harbor, an open framework for running agents in sandboxed environments.
  • OpenThoughts-Agent extends reasoning-data experimentation into agent training. Marten helped coordinate the project, whose research paper reports more than 100 ablation experiments, a 100,000-example training dataset, and 44.8 percent average accuracy across seven agent benchmarks.

Read the topics behind these talks

2 conference talks

Key ideas

Scroll to read ↓

Harbor connects agent evaluation, production work, and training through one execution loop: give an agent a task, preserve its trajectory, and grade the resulting state.

  • When reading the code was enough
    0:16 ↗
  • A phone number reveals the trade-off
    3:30 ↗
  • The machine-learning loop, translated
    5:22 ↗
  • From an environment to an evaluation result
    8:02 ↗
  • Own the eval before choosing the model
    11:17 ↗
  • Running evaluations in parallel
    14:15 ↗
  • Production work uses the same machinery
    15:48 ↗
  • Turn session corrections into the next evaluation
    16:50 ↗
  • Rollout outputs become optimization inputs
    18:36 ↗
  • A shared format across different kinds of work
    19:09 ↗

Key ideas

Scroll to read ↓

Strong reasoning students need more than a training algorithm: OpenThoughts tests which questions, teachers, sampling strategies, and filters make supervised fine-tuning effective.

  • The missing recipe behind reasoning gains
    0:35 ↗
  • Separate the dataset comparison from the model comparison
    3:12 ↗
  • Improve the recipe before paying to scale it
    5:37 ↗
  • More traces can substitute for more unique questions
    7:54 ↗
  • Select teachers and sources by what the student learns
    8:52 ↗
  • Filter for useful difficulty, not every conventional quality signal
    9:51 ↗
  • Adapt the recipe and make evaluation reliable
    11:34 ↗
  • A specialized student can surpass its teacher
    14:16 ↗
  • The released artifacts
    15:16 ↗
  • How ordinary SFT teaches longer reasoning
    16:48 ↗
  • What makes a good teacher—and can a trace be repaired?
    17:35 ↗

References