analiza aiqbench
This research introduces a novel evaluation framework for multi-agent systems, quantifying how consensus formation and information sharing impact the accuracy of joint decision-making tasks. By analyzing position trajectories and communication history across thousands of runs, the study demonstrates that while agents can converge on accurate aggregate answers, persistent disagreement may still exist without explicit explanation sharing. The work addresses a critical gap in assessing the reliability and transparency of interconnected AI agent networks.
Measuring Consensus in AI Agent Networks
arXiv:2610.24833v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: As AI agents become increasingly connected through networks and take on tasks that require negotiation and joint decision-making, a systematic approach is needed to assess how their views converge and what information supports their decisions. We present an evaluation framework that treats consensus formation as the evolution of publicly stated positions toward a shared region, using accumulated communication history as context. The framework tracks position trajectories, group dispersion, and information expressed in public messages. Two case studies examine staffing decisions based on distributed facts and decisions requiring agents to reconcile duplicate information and a cancelled contract. Results from 1,872 completed runs associate sharing explanations with more accurate group decisions, while the second task reveals persistent disagreement despite accurate aggregate answers. Membership-change experiments provide a complementary evaluation. By separating convergence among agents from progress toward a task's full-information answer, the framework relates decision accuracy and bounded disagreement to the information available during the exchange.
Abstract:As AI agents become increasingly connected through networks and take on tasks that require negotiation and joint decision-making, a systematic approach is needed to assess how their views converge and what information supports their decisions. We present an evaluation framework that treats consensus formation as the evolution of publicly stated positions toward a shared region, using accumulated communication history as context. The framework tracks position trajectories, group dispersion, and information expressed in public messages. Two case studies examine staffing decisions based on distributed facts and decisions requiring agents to reconcile duplicate information and a cancelled contract. Results from 1,872 completed runs associate sharing explanations with more accurate group decisions, while the second task reveals persistent disagreement despite accurate aggregate answers. Membership-change experiments provide a complementary evaluation. By separating convergence among agents from progress toward a task's full-information answer, the framework relates decision accuracy and bounded disagreement to the information available during the exchange.
4 pages. Accepted at the NANDA Workshop, IEEE TPS-ISA 2026
Multiagent Systems (cs.MA); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
arXiv:2610.24833 [cs.MA]
(or arXiv:2610.24833v1 [cs.MA] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.24833 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.
Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 258 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe
Consensus And Information Redistribution In Quantum Networks
arXiv · 28 oct. 2026
Does Recursive Knowledge Construction Help Agents Verify Consensus Claims in Science?
arXiv · 2 nov. 2026
Metropolis-Hastings Dominates Importance Resampling for Policy Composition
arXiv · 5 oct. 2026
The Deliberative Illusion: Diagnosing Factual Attrition and Stance Homogenization in Multi-Agent LLM Deliberation
arXiv · 3 iun. 2026