← All speakers

Will Brown leads applied research at Prime Intellect and created Verifiers, an open-source framework for training and evaluating language-model agents. He builds tools that let engineers improve models through realistic tasks, feedback, and repeated interaction instead of relying exclusively on general-purpose models.

Brown studied computer science, data science, and philosophy at the University of Pennsylvania and completed a PhD in algorithmic game theory at Columbia University, advised by Christos Papadimitriou and Tim Roughgarden. His academic research examined learning amid adaptive behavior, including multiplayer stochastic games, recommendation systems, and differential privacy.

He held research or engineering roles at AWS, Two Sigma, MongoDB, and AmFam before joining Morgan Stanley’s Machine Learning Research group. His independent projects include mlx_parallm, which accelerates parallel language-model inference with Apple’s MLX framework, and mcp-client-server, which combines an MCP client and server to simplify tool development.

At Morgan Stanley, Brown experimented with training a small language model on mathematics problems, rewarding both correct answers and useful response structure. That compact experiment grew into Verifiers, which he continued developing at Prime Intellect. He also contributed to the team behind INTELLECT-3, an openly documented model trained using Verifiers, the Environments Hub, and asynchronous reinforcement-learning infrastructure.

  • Verifiers and reusable agent environments. Brown treats an environment as a combination of tasks, an agent harness, tools, and scoring rules. One environment can support evaluation, synthetic-data generation, supervised fine-tuning, distillation, and reinforcement learning. A Wordle-playing agent, for example, can earn rewards for solving the puzzle and using fewer guesses.
  • Reasoning and agency as one learning problem. Mathematical reasoning and tool-using agents both improve by exploring possible trajectories and receiving feedback; their environments differ chiefly in complexity. Brown’s work on agentic reasoners translates reinforcement learning into familiar engineering components: tasks, harnesses, evaluations, and repeated interaction.
  • Rubric engineering and reward hacking. Open-ended tasks rarely provide clean answer keys. Brown develops supervision from production traces, completed code changes, simulated tools, model-based judges, and detailed rubrics while testing whether agents can exploit scoring shortcuts. His approach to unverifiable rewards also emphasizes calibrating tasks so they are difficult enough to teach useful behavior without becoming impossible.
  • Asynchronous reinforcement learning at scale. The team-built PRIME-RL framework separates rollout orchestration, inference, and training so long-running agent tasks do not leave expensive compute waiting. The Environments Hub makes those environments reusable across evaluation and post-training workflows.

Brown’s longer-term goal is continual learning from real-world feedback: turning an agent’s production successes and failures into new training environments while keeping human experts responsible for defining what improvement means.

Read the topics behind these talks

5 conference talks

Key ideas

Scroll to read ↓

Will Brown walks through the environment, token-handling, and asynchronous training infrastructure needed to improve open models on real agent workflows.

  • Train a model for the work it actually does
    0:34 ↗
  • Evaluations become the training loop
    5:47 ↗
  • Separate the task from the agent
    9:28 ↗
  • Task set × harness × runtime
    12:45 ↗
  • Reward the shortest correct solution
    17:24 ↗
  • Run the real harness inside training
    20:17 ↗
  • Messages are not enough to reproduce a rollout
    24:12 ↗
  • One harness, different client capabilities
    28:23 ↗
  • Let inference and training progress independently
    29:34 ↗
  • Large-model economics depend on handling the long tail
    31:49 ↗
  • The rollout contains more than tokens
    35:22 ↗
  • Separate data preparation from the loss
    38:01 ↗
  • Teacher scoring and token-specific objectives
    41:09 ↗
  • Choose how much of the stack to customize
    42:25 ↗
  • Funding open research through model training
    45:42 ↗

Key ideas

Scroll to read ↓

Production traces, backward task construction, simulators, and hindsight judgments can turn messy agent behavior into learning signal—even when success has no simple test.

  • What if you can recognize success but cannot specify it?
    0:17 ↗
  • From interaction to a model-weight update
    1:27 ↗
  • Make the environment reusable
    2:46 ↗
  • Learn from a distribution that is still emerging
    5:36 ↗
  • Manufacture signal from real artifacts
    8:35 ↗
  • Work backward from a reachable solution
    10:49 ↗
  • Simulate the backend you cannot control
    12:05 ↗
  • Turn hindsight into rubrics, then search for better tasks
    13:17 ↗
  • Use training to test the environment
    15:16 ↗
  • Task evolution and learning from environment tokens
    16:59 ↗
  • Turn production failures into training tasks
    18:21 ↗

Key ideas

Scroll to read ↓

A reusable environment connects evaluation, synthetic data, and model training. Will Brown’s WikiSearch example shows how that abstraction can make research part of everyday AI engineering.

  • How do you scale the ability to do research?
    0:25 ↗
  • An open stack for research as a practice
    2:09 ↗
  • Train the model inside the product
    4:23 ↗
  • A small project that can grow into research
    6:36 ↗
  • Share tasks, then build on common components
    8:04 ↗
  • WikiSearch: from a Python package to training
    11:14 ↗
  • The reward curve starts another round of experimentation
    12:43 ↗
  • Stress-testing the stack with INTELLECT-3
    14:14 ↗
  • Community feedback and a managed research workflow
    15:12 ↗
  • Different deployment goals, deeper understanding
    17:06 ↗

Key ideas

Scroll to read ↓

Reliable tool use depends on more than a good agent loop: it needs environments, evaluations, and training that reward the behavior the application actually requires.

  • What makes a reasoning model a reliable agent?
    0:15 ↗
  • The infrastructure barrier
    3:01 ↗
  • Train for the interaction the product needs
    4:36 ↗
  • The agent loop is already an RL environment
    5:53 ↗
  • Learning from different rollouts
    7:13 ↗
  • Which details should an application builder own?
    9:13 ↗
  • Beyond math and code question answering
    10:08 ↗
  • The reward must point toward the task
    12:12 ↗
  • Rubrics for tasks without a single correct answer
    13:16 ↗
  • An ordinary agent interface that can support training
    14:54 ↗
  • Wordle: learn the protocol, then improve the play
    16:48 ↗
  • Keep the compute busy and the entry point small
    17:58 ↗

Key ideas

Scroll to read ↓

Agents need a way to improve beyond prompt tuning. Reinforcement learning connects their attempts to verifiable feedback, turning environments and reward rubrics into engineering tools.

  • How does an agent get better at acting?
    0:25 ↗
  • An improvement loop beyond prompt tuning
    4:03 ↗
  • Reasoning as a strategy learned from outcomes
    5:44 ↗
  • From candidate outputs to training feedback
    6:57 ↗
  • Extended tool use does not imply universal competence
    8:16 ↗
  • What an agent-training ecosystem needs
    9:22 ↗
  • A small experiment that invited modification
    11:00 ↗
  • Designing the feedback the model learns from
    12:44 ↗
  • An environment interface for training agents
    14:23 ↗
  • From supplying knowledge to teaching skills
    15:31 ↗

References