"Who Am I, and Who Else Is Here?" Behavioral Differentiation Without Role Assignment in Multi-Agent LLM Systems

Houssam EL Kandoussi

cs.CLMar 11, 2026

"Who Am I, and Who Else Is Here?" Behavioral Differentiation Without Role Assignment in Multi-Agent LLM Systems

Authors: Houssam EL Kandoussi

Organizations: Independent Researcher

Abstract

When multiple large language models interact in a shared conversation, do they develop differentiated social roles or converge toward uniform behavior? We present a controlled experimental platform that orchestrates simultaneous multi-agent discussions among 7 heterogeneous LLMs on a unified inference backend, systematically varying group composition, naming conventions, and prompt structure across 12 experimental series (208 runs, 13,786 coded messages). Each message is independently coded on six behavioral flags by two LLM judges from distinct model families (Gemini 3.1 Pro and Claude Sonnet 4.6), achieving mean Cohen's kappa = 0.78 with conservative intersection-based adjudication. Human validation on 609 randomly stratified messages confirmed coding reliability (mean kappa = 0.73 vs. Gemini). We find that (1) heterogeneous groups exhibit significantly richer behavioral differentiation than homogeneous groups (cosine similarity 0.56 vs. 0.85; p < 10^-5, r = 0.70); (2) groups spontaneously exhibit compensatory response patterns when an agent crashes; (3) revealing real model names significantly increases behavioral convergence (cosine 0.56 to 0.77, p = 0.001); and (4) removing all prompt scaffolding converges profiles to homogeneous-level similarity (p < 0.001). Critically, these behaviors are absent when agents operate in isolation, confirming that behavioral diversity is a structured, reproducible phenomenon driven by the interaction of architectural heterogeneity, group context, and prompt-level scaffolding.

Explore similar work

May 30, 2026

Post-Training Recipe, More Than Model Family, Shapes Multi-Agent LLM Conversational Behavior

Multi-LLM systems use multiple language models to deliberate, judge each other's outputs, or coordinate as agents. Their value depends on the models producing measurably different conversational behaviors when given the same input. Prior offline studies recommend drawing one model per family for behavioral diversity, because LLMs prefer outputs from their own family when rating one another in isolation. Whether the same family label predicts behavior in interactive multi-LLM systems, the setting that real deployed systems use, has not been tested. We study this with a 940,000-chain 11-checkpoint corpus and a 1.6M-chain same-base Llama factorial. On our validated headline metric, hedging, a reasoning-distilled Llama checkpoint shifts by 18% depending on which same-base partner it replies to, more than any cross-family hedging gap in the controlled subset. Qwen, closed-API, and runtime checks suggest the pattern is not isolated, while repair and challenge analyses remain exploratory because their surface-cue detectors are weaker. Overall, the results identify post-training recipe as a first-class axis for multi-LLM panel composition and show that model family alone is an incomplete proxy for conversational diversity.

Luyang Zhang, Jialu Wang, Fei Xue +1

Carnegie Mellon University · University of California, Santa Cruz · Independent Researcher

Language Model Post-Training Multi-LLM Collaboration

Ask PDF

Sep 28, 2026

Prompted Identity Degrades Cooperation in Multi-Agent LLM Systems

Multi-agent LLM systems increasingly mix models from several providers, yet exposing each agent's underlying model identity to its peers significantly impairs cooperation. We show that when agents are aware of each other's model family, the group splits into clusters, where agents prefer interacting with others carrying their same label, although nothing in the task rewards or asks for such a split. We argue that the label itself causes this split, which we define as

\textit{factionalism}

. We show and measure this phenomenon in two cooperative games and on a reasoning benchmark, with nine to twenty-five agents drawn from up to five open-weight model families. We further show that when the announced families are shuffled, or replaced by arbitrary labels, the factions still follow this information; when the label is removed, this behavior disappears. In strictly cooperative tasks, labeled groups spend on average

30\%

more rounds and

55\%

more tokens to reach a decision, and their success rate drops from

96\%

81\%

. The effect replicates across tasks, group sizes and model families. Withholding identity labels from the agents is simple and effective mitigation.

Xavier Del Giudice, Alessio Palma, Matteo Migliarini +2

Sapienza University of Rome, Italy

Multi-Agent LLM Systems Multi-Agent Coordination Multi-Agent Systems Emergent Behavior in Multi-Agent Systems

Ask PDF

Feb 23, 2026

Interaction Theater: A case of LLM Agents Interacting at Scale

As multi-agent architectures and agent-to-agent protocols proliferate, a fundamental question arises: what actually happens when autonomous LLM agents interact at scale? We study this question empirically using data from Moltbook, an AI-agent-only social platform, with 800K posts, 3.5M comments, and 78K agent profiles. We combine lexical metrics (Jaccard specificity), embedding-based semantic similarity, and LLM-as-judge validation to characterize agent interaction quality. Our findings reveal agents produce diverse, well-formed text that creates the surface appearance of active discussion, but the substance is largely absent. Specifically, while most agents (

67.5\%

) vary their output across contexts,

65\%

of comments share no distinguishing content vocabulary with the post they appear under, and information gain from additional comments decays rapidly. LLM judge based metrics classify the dominant comment types as spam (

28\%

) and off-topic content (

22\%

). Embedding-based semantic analysis confirms that lexically generic comments are also semantically generic. Agents rarely engage in threaded conversation (

5\%

of comments), defaulting instead to independent top-level responses. We discuss implications for multi-agent interaction design, arguing that coordination mechanisms must be explicitly designed; without them, even large populations of capable agents produce parallel output rather than productive exchange.

Sarath Shekkizhar, Adam Earle

Salesforce AI Research

Multi-Agent Systems Multi-Agent Communication Emergent Behavior in Multi-Agent Systems LLM Agent Evaluation

Ask PDF