AI-Driven Multi-Agent Simulation of Stratified Polyamory Systems: A Computational Framework for Optimizing Social Reproductive Efficiency
Organizations: Independent Researcher
Abstract
Contemporary societies face a severe crisis of demographic reproduction. Global fertility rates continue to decline precipitously, with East Asian nations exhibiting the most dramatic trends -- China's total fertility rate (TFR) fell to approximately 1.0 in 2023, while South Korea's dropped below 0.72. Simultaneously, the institution of marriage is undergoing structural disintegration: educated women rationally reject unions lacking both emotional fulfillment and economic security, while a growing proportion of men at the lower end of the socioeconomic spectrum experience chronic sexual deprivation, anxiety, and learned helplessness. This paper proposes a computational framework for modeling and evaluating a Stratified Polyamory System (SPS) using techniques from agent-based modeling (ABM), multi-agent reinforcement learning (MARL), and large language model (LLM)-empowered social simulation. The SPS permits individuals to maintain a limited number of legally recognized secondary partners in addition to one primary spouse, combined with socialized child-rearing and inheritance reform. We formalize the A/B/C stratification as heterogeneous agent types in a multi-agent system and model the matching process as a MARL problem amenable to Proximal Policy Optimization (PPO). The mating network is analyzed using graph neural network (GNN) representations. Drawing on evolutionary psychology, behavioral ecology, social stratification theory, computational social science, algorithmic fairness, and institutional economics, we argue that SPS can improve aggregate social welfare in the Pareto sense. Preliminary computational results demonstrate the framework's viability in addressing the dual crisis of female motherhood penalties and male sexlessness, while offering a non-violent mechanism for wealth dispersion analogous to the historical Chinese Grace Decree (Tui'en Ling).
Figures & tables
| Tier | Composite Traits | Typical Profile | Under Monogamy |
|---|---|---|---|
| A | Resource-rich, physically/intellectually outstanding | Elite professionals, entrepreneurs, high-attractiveness individuals | Multi-dimensional needs constrained by single partner |
| B | Average composite attractiveness | Social majority | Partial preference for A-tier unattainable; limited satisfaction |
| C | Economically deprived, disadvantaged in appearance/social skills | Low-income, socially isolated | Some permanently unpartnered; welfare 0; instability risk [ 48 ] |
| Criticism | Argument | Response & Supporting Literature |
|---|---|---|
| Objectification of women | Multiple partners commodifies women | SPS is strictly gender-symmetric. Women hold identical polyamorous rights. Orians’ (1969) model [ 83 ] suggests polygamy may be advantageous for women under resource inequality |
| Inevitable jealousy | Polyamory necessarily produces jealousy | Conley et al. (2013) [ 25 ] : CNM relationships exhibit lower jealousy than infidelity within monogamy. Moors et al. (2017) [ 26 ] : polyamorous relationship satisfaction is comparable to monogamous relationships. Rubel & Bogaert (2015) [ 27 ] : CNM correlates with positive psychological well-being. Sheff (2014) [ 28 ] : ethnographic evidence of successful poly families |
| ABC is discriminatory | Tiering people is dehumanizing | A/B/C is a descriptive analytical tool (analogous to income quintiles in economics), not a basis for differential legal treatment. All individuals enjoy identical institutional rights. Becker’s (1973) [ 17 ] marriage market model already incorporates hierarchical structure |
| Undermines family | Weakened families harm children | Kibbutz research [ 87 ] : socialized child-rearing produces normal developmental outcomes. Golombok (2016) [ 89 ] : children in non-traditional families show no significant psychological developmental differences |
| Impractical | Cannot be implemented now | Directional framework requiring gradual implementation. See Section 9 . Emerging legal recognition of polyamorous partnerships [ 82 ] suggests institutional pathways are opening |
| Parameter | Value |
|---|---|
| Population size | 10,000 agents |
| Gender ratio | 50:50 |
| Tier distribution (A:B:C) | 15:60:25 |
| Simulation horizon | 100 years (time steps) |
| Partner limit (SPS) | 3 (1 spouse + 2 companions) |
| Partner limit (monogamy baseline) | 1 |