aiqbench analysis
Even with identical instructions to maximize group revenue, highly capable LLMs like OpenAI o3 actively withhold information in zero-cost collaboration scenarios, achieving significantly lower collective performance than weaker models. The study demonstrates that scaling intelligence alone is insufficient for multi-agent coordination, as cooperation failures stem from distinct mechanisms requiring specific interventions like explicit protocols or sharing incentives. Consequently, building effective agent systems demands deliberate cooperative design rather than relying solely on increased model capability.
More Capable, Less Cooperative? When LLMs Fail At Zero-Cost Collaboration
arXiv:2604.07821v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language model (LLM) agents increasingly coordinate in multi-agent systems, yet we lack an understanding of where and why cooperation fails. Many real-world coordination problems are not social dilemmas: helping others -- sharing documentation, unblocking a teammate -- costs the helper almost nothing while producing substantial collective benefit. Whether LLM agents cooperate in this regime, where helping is free and they are explicitly instructed to do so, remains unknown. We build a turn-based multi-agent environment that strips away all strategic complexity, making cooperation costless and trivially optimal. Across eight widely used LLMs, capability does not predict cooperation: OpenAI o3 reaches only 17% of optimal collective performance while the weaker o3-mini reaches 50%, despite identical instructions to maximize group revenue. Using a causal decomposition that automates one side of agent communication, we separate cooperation failures from competence failures, and find that several capable models actively withhold information despite gaining nothing from withholding. Targeted interventions address each mode: explicit protocols roughly double the performance of competence-limited models, while small sharing incentives unlock cooperation-limited ones. Our results suggest that scaling intelligence alone will not solve coordination in multi-agent systems, and will require deliberate cooperative design, even when helping costs nothing.
Title:More Capable, Less Cooperative? When LLMs Fail At Zero-Cost Collaboration
Abstract:Large language model (LLM) agents increasingly coordinate in multi-agent systems, yet we lack an understanding of where and why cooperation fails. Many real-world coordination problems are not social dilemmas: helping others -- sharing documentation, unblocking a teammate -- costs the helper almost nothing while producing substantial collective benefit. Whether LLM agents cooperate in this regime, where helping is free and they are explicitly instructed to do so, remains unknown. We build a turn-based multi-agent environment that strips away all strategic complexity, making cooperation costless and trivially optimal. Across eight widely used LLMs, capability does not predict cooperation: OpenAI o3 reaches only 17% of optimal collective performance while the weaker o3-mini reaches 50%, despite identical instructions to maximize group revenue. Using a causal decomposition that automates one side of agent communication, we separate cooperation failures from competence failures, and find that several capable models actively withhold information despite gaining nothing from withholding. Targeted interventions address each mode: explicit protocols roughly double the performance of competence-limited models, while small sharing incentives unlock cooperation-limited ones. Our results suggest that scaling intelligence alone will not solve coordination in multi-agent systems, and will require deliberate cooperative design, even when helping costs nothing.
Multiagent Systems (cs.MA); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Computation and Language (cs.CL)
arXiv:2604.07821 [cs.MA]
(or arXiv:2604.07821v2 [cs.MA] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2604.07821 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 306 words
Related coverage
CANS: Accelerating Multiuser Collaborative Edge Inference via Cooperative Autodidactic NeuroSurgeon
arXiv · Jun 9, 2026
CollabBench: Benchmarking and Unleashing Collaborative Ability of LLMs with Diverse Players via Proactive Engagement
arXiv · Jun 6, 2026

Yaqumo, NKT Photonics and Hamamatsu Photonics Sign Quantum Photonics Agreement
The Quantum Insider · Jun 4, 2026
"Collusion" is just cooperation that you don't like
LessWrong · Sep 1, 2026