The paper shows that classical consensus theory, which relies on network topology and convex update rules, fails for large language models (LLMs). By measuring token‑level updates across eight instruction‑tuned models and 73,080 exchanges, the authors find that LLMs violate convexity, exhibit negative weights, and are driven by internal update bias rather than network structure. Simulations with 10,000 agents confirm that algebraic connectivity explains almost none of the outcome variance, leading populations to converge on confidently false claims regardless of their network topology.
arXiv:2607. 03695v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language model (LLM) agents are increasingly deployed in interacting populations, raising the question of what such populations come to believe collectively.
arXiv:2608. 16578v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: AI agents increasingly operate as part of interacting systems rather than in isolation.
The study investigates how limited reading capacity and claim wording influence consensus outcomes in language‑model networks. By modeling message capacity as the number of messages an agent reads, the authors show that when agents read fewer than about 6.4 messages on average, a wrong consensus becomes unreachable. However, the wording of a claim—its inherent threshold—can override this effect, leading to incorrect consensus even when most agents start correct.
arXiv:2606. 19494v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Multi-agent LLM deliberation, where agents exchange and revise answers over several rounds, is increasingly used to improve reasoning and accuracy, yet how and why it works is rarely modelled.
The paper introduces Bayesian Chronicle Agents (BCA), a lightweight belief layer that separates an LLM agent’s internal stance from its outward speech. Each stance is represented as a probability updated via a single Bayesian step per utterance, with a single prior‑strength parameter κ controlling stubbornness. By sweeping κ, the authors generate three controllable opinion‑dynamics regimes—consensus, persistent disagreement, and committed‑minority influence—matching Friedkin–Johnsen theory and demonstrating recoverable, auditable belief states across models.
arXiv:2604.11312v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large Language Models are increasingly deployed as interacting agents in settings such as online platforms, recommendation systems, and multi...
arXiv:2606. 30454v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as agents in simulations of social systems, yet it remains unclear when their behavior can be interpreted as a faithful proxy for human decision-making.
The paper introduces TalkMesh, a decentralized network of small language model agents that learn to communicate effectively during inference. Each agent proposes an answer, scores it with a confidence head, and the most confident agent broadcasts a hint; lower‑confidence agents revise their proposals if a new suggestion scores higher. This gossip‑based consensus, trained via group relative policy optimization, enables a mesh of three agents to match the accuracy of majority voting over 32 samples, and scales to larger meshes to significantly boost performance on benchmarks like GSM8K and MATH-500.
The paper investigates how a minority of biased agents in a multi‑agent system of large language models (LLMs) can amplify bias through textual interactions. Even a small percentage of persistently extreme agents causes significant opinion shifts among the non‑biased agents, with the effect occurring faster in the Llama 3.2 model than in a classical Friedkin‑Johnsen model. Semantic analysis shows that rhetorical consistency rises with biased exposure and that non‑biased agents adopt the biased vocabulary even when their numerical opinions change only modestly.
The paper introduces Bayesian Dialectical Argumentation (BDA), a method for aggregating answers from multiple large language models (LLMs) in a council setting. BDA treats each LLM’s typed moves—proposals, challenges, and concessions—as evidence in a classical annotator model, estimating per-agent reliability even when some agents are persistently unreliable. By weighting evidence according to these inferred reliabilities, BDA produces calibrated posterior probabilities for candidate answers and can invert unreliable agents instead of merely outvoting them, achieving superior calibration and robustness on both binary and multi-class benchmarks without extra LLM calls.
The paper studies how language‑model agents adopt beliefs, measuring the probability that an agent accepts a claim based on the number of peers endorsing it. The adoption curve is sigmoid, indicating complex contagion, with a threshold influenced by the claim’s plausibility, the source’s reliability, and the agent’s disposition—dimensions that can be collapsed into a single coherence metric relative to the agent’s prior beliefs. In networks of AI agents, belief spread is stronger on clustered than random networks, and the system shows a bifurcating cascade window and hysteretic consensus that makes consensus difficult to reverse once formed.
arXiv:2608. 11215v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Simulating societies of many large language model (LLM) agents is expensive, yet the questions asked of such simulations are usually macroscopic: phase behaviour, stylised facts, and scaling with the number of agents $N$, not the cognition of any single agent.