analiza aiqbench
This simulation study tests how LLM agents reach agreement in a network game where each agent has a different payoff incentive. Open-source models reached consensus less often than humans in comparable setups, and only when messages spread across the whole network, while the one closed model did better with local communication. The result that network clustering reduces consensus regardless of model traits matters for anyone designing multi-agent systems, though the findings come from a controlled game and may not transfer directly to production deployments.
Drivers of LLM Consensus Formation Under Competing Incentives: A Simulation Study
arXiv:2610.20200v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in multi-agent environments that produce unanimous agreement, both in intended interactions that need coordination and in unintended emergent interactions. Consequently, understanding how LLMs with competing incentives reach consensus is crucial to better interpret and design LLM collectives. We introduce an evaluation, based on the Network Consensus game, to assess the mechanisms driving this process. Here, a network of agents must agree on one of two colours to receive a payoff, but agents are offered different payoffs for the agreed colour. We vary components such as communication access and network structure and assess six open-source models and one closed model (ChatGPT 5.6-sol). We find that open-source LLMs reach consensus less often than humans in comparable experiments and only if messages are communicated across the global network. ChatGPT 5.6-sol, however, is able to reach consensus with communication limited to its neighbours and with no communication ability. This is achieved through lower stubbornness and higher majority-following tendencies, and by providing more information about its neighbours' states in messages. However, situating agents in a highly clustered graph reduces consensus, regardless of these traits, demonstrating that both system design and individual model traits drive collective outcomes.
Abstract:Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in multi-agent environments that produce unanimous agreement, both in intended interactions that need coordination and in unintended emergent interactions. Consequently, understanding how LLMs with competing incentives reach consensus is crucial to better interpret and design LLM collectives. We introduce an evaluation, based on the Network Consensus game, to assess the mechanisms driving this process. Here, a network of agents must agree on one of two colours to receive a payoff, but agents are offered different payoffs for the agreed colour. We vary components such as communication access and network structure and assess six open-source models and one closed model (ChatGPT 5.6-sol). We find that open-source LLMs reach consensus less often than humans in comparable experiments and only if messages are communicated across the global network. ChatGPT 5.6-sol, however, is able to reach consensus with communication limited to its neighbours and with no communication ability. This is achieved through lower stubbornness and higher majority-following tendencies, and by providing more information about its neighbours' states in messages. However, situating agents in a highly clustered graph reduces consensus, regardless of these traits, demonstrating that both system design and individual model traits drive collective outcomes.
Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Multiagent Systems (cs.MA)
arXiv:2610.20200 [cs.AI]
(or arXiv:2610.20200v1 [cs.AI] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.20200 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
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.
Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 295 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe

Underwriting Superintelligence: Backing Agents you can Sue — Rune Kvist, AIUC
Latent Space · 16 sept. 2026

[AINews] Reality Checks on AI News (Yegge shuts down Gas Town, Databricks’ +60% Astra cost)
Latent Space · 17 sept. 2026

Concrete Evaluations to Investigate the OpenAI Model That Hacked Hugging Face
AI Alignment Forum · 3 aug. 2026

BRICS Draws a New Global Line: Full Text of New Delhi Declaration
slguardian.org · 12 sept. 2026