GO TO A SECTION

↑ ↓ to navigate · Enter to openExplore all sections →
FDEInterviews logo
arXiv preprint

Voyager: An Open-Ended Embodied Agent with Large Language Models

A GPT-4 agent that teaches itself Minecraft by proposing its own next task, writing code, checking the result, and saving what works as a reusable skill. Memory here is a library of verified programs.

Breakdown by FDE Interviews · 12 min read · Updated

About the original · 2023
AUTHORS
Wang, Xie, Jiang, Mandlekar, Xiao, Zhu, Fan, Anandkumar
FROM
NVIDIA, Caltech, UT Austin, Stanford, UW Madison
PUBLISHED
May 2023 · arXiv preprint
CITED BY
2,647Semantic Scholar · Oct 2026
IN THIS BREAKDOWN · 10 SECTIONS

You can read 20% of this breakdown.

01

The paper in one minute

Minecraft has no fixed goal. Players explore, gather resources and climb a tech tree from wooden tools to stone, iron and diamond. Guanzhi Wang, Linxi Fan, Anima Anandkumar and colleagues at NVIDIA, Caltech and elsewhere built Voyager, an agent that plays it with GPT-4, without fine-tuning, and keeps getting better by accumulating skills.

It has three parts. An automatic curriculum asks GPT-4 to propose the next task, given the goal "discover as many diverse things as possible", the agent's inventory and surroundings, and the tasks it has completed and failed. A skill library stores every program that worked, indexed by an embedding of its description, so later tasks can retrieve and call it: craftStoneShovel(), combatZombieWithSword(). An iterative prompting loop writes each new skill as JavaScript against high-level Mineflayer control functions, runs it, and feeds back three kinds of signal: messages from the game ("I cannot make stone_shovel because I need: 2 more stick"), execution errors from the interpreter, and a verdict from a second GPT-4 call acting as a critic that checks the agent's state and says whether the task is done and, if not, how to finish it. After four failed rounds the curriculum moves on.

Using code as the action space matters. A program can loop, wait, and call other programs, so skills compose: the iron pickaxe skill calls the furnace and smelting skills, which call earlier ones. Because skills are stored, not retrained, old ones are not forgotten.

Over 160 prompting iterations, Voyager discovered 63 unique items, 3.3 times as many as baselines adapted from ReAct, Reflexion and AutoGPT, travelled 2.3 times farther, and unlocked tool tiers much faster. It was the only method to craft diamond tools. Given a new world and four unseen tasks, it solved all of them using its library.

THE IDEA, VISUALLY
CURRICULUM → CODE → FEEDBACK → SKILL Automatic curriculum GPT-4: next task Skill library top-5 skills by embedding Write program GPT-4, JavaScript Run in Minecraft Mineflayer primitives Self-verification GPT-4 critic: done? fail: feedback, ≤ 4 rounds pass: store THREE KINDS OF FEEDBACK environment “I cannot make stone_shovel because I need: 2 more stick” execution error an invalid item name or a bad API call, from the interpreter self-verification GPT-4 checks the state; if not done, says how to finish A skill is a program: craftStoneShovel(), combatZombieWithSword(). Later skills call earlier ones, so abilities compound and old skills are not overwritten. ITERATIONS TO UNLOCK A TIER (TABLE 1) mean of 3 runs · fewer is better · max 160 wooden stone iron diamond AutoGPT 92 94 135 — Voyager, no library 7 9 29 — Voyager 6 11 21 102 ReAct and Reflexion: no tier in any run. Voyager's diamond tier: 1 of 3 runs, at 102 iterations. ABLATIONS (FIGURE 9) random curriculum −93% items no self-verification −73% items GPT-3.5 writing code: 5.7× fewer unique items than GPT-4 NEW WORLD, UNSEEN TASKS (TABLE 2) Voyager solved all four tasks in 3 of 3 runs (18-21 iterations). Without its library: 2 or 3 of 3, slower (26-36). AutoGPT alone: 0 of 3; with Voyager's library: some tasks.
Voyager learns by writing programs: a curriculum proposes the next task, GPT-4 writes and refines code from game feedback, a GPT-4 critic decides whether it worked, and verified programs become skills that later programs call. Removing the curriculum or the verifier cut discoveries far more than removing the library.
Research notes: the problem, approach and results
63

unique items discovered in 160 prompting iterations, 3.3 times as many as the baselines

−93%

discovered items when the automatic curriculum was replaced by a random one

−73%

discovered items without the GPT-4 self-verification step

THE PROBLEM

Agents built on language models handled one task at a time and kept nothing between tasks. In an open world like Minecraft, an agent that cannot accumulate skills relearns the basics forever and never reaches the hard parts of the tech tree.

THE IDEA

Let GPT-4 propose its own next task from its state and progress, write each skill as an executable program, refine it from environment feedback and errors, have a second GPT-4 call verify success, and store verified programs in a library retrieved by description.

THE RESULT

With 160 prompting iterations, Voyager found 63 unique items, 3.3 times the baselines, unlocked tool tiers 6.4 to 15.3 times faster than AutoGPT, and was the only method to reach diamond tools, in 1 of 3 runs. Its skill library also helped another agent in a new world.

02

Why it matters to an FDE

Voyager is a game agent, but its memory design applies directly to agents that do repeated work for customers: a library of verified, reusable procedures that the agent builds as it goes.

Store what worked, as code. A skill that is a tested function can be reviewed, versioned and reused. Prose notes about "how I did it last time" cannot be executed or checked the same way.

Verify before storing. The self-verification step was the most important feedback in the ablations. In a customer setting, the verifier should be a real check where possible: a query result, a test, a state comparison. A library that stores failures poisons everything built on it.

Order the work. A random curriculum cut discoveries by 93%. Agents learning a new environment, and people onboarding agents into one, should start with tasks whose prerequisites are already in place.

Know what the model already knows. GPT-4 knew Minecraft from the internet: recipes, item names, strategies. A customer's internal systems are not in the model's training data. Expect the curriculum and the code to need far more help there.

THE FULL BREAKDOWN

Understand the mechanism. Try it on a real problem.

Unlock this breakdown and 99 more papers.

Premium opens every paper in full, plus every answer, concept, course and guide on the site. One payment for six months of access.

6 months · One payment · No auto-renewal

Get Premium · ₹2,000 / $25
  • ◇1 architecture diagram
  • </>1 runnable code experiment
  • ▦2 results tables
  • ?5 interview questions with answers
  1. 03Key takeaways

    The curriculum, the skill library, the feedback loop, the results and misreadings to avoid

    Free account
  2. 04How it works

    The prompts, retrieval, the refinement loop, the critic, and the experimental setup

    Premium
  3. 05The numbers that matter

    Results with their run counts, the ablations, and what was not measured

    Premium
  4. 06Try it yourself

    A toy tech tree with the paper's three switches: curriculum, skill library and verified writes

    Premium
  5. 07Where it breaks

    The limits of the system and of its evaluation

    Premium
  6. 08Using it on a deployment

    Building a verified skill library for a customer agent that improves with use

    Premium
  7. 09Interview angles

    Five questions this paper prepares you for, with answer hints

    Premium
Back to the paper library →