Beyond Cash Flows: A Multi-Agent AI Framework for Valuing Clinical-Stage, Cross-Border Biotechnology

AI-native biotechnology companies are often designed by copying human biotech org charts into agent roles. We argue for a different abstraction: a Company World Model, defined as a persistent asset-to-value state representation with transition models, explicit value functions, planning, and updating across scientific, regulatory, BD, commercial, financial, and execution constraints. We introduce a dry-lab benchmark for testing whether AI-agent organizations should mimic departments or operate around such a world model. The benchmark contains 45 retrospective public-information decision cases with strict time cutoffs, hidden outcomes, common schemas, automatic scoring, and blinded pairwise judging. We compare human-org-mimic, stronger human-org-mimic-plus, AI-native asset-centric, and AI-native value-conversion architectures. The value-conversion architecture is a prompt-level approximation of a Company World Model: a Live Asset Value Record updated by Deal, Approval, Revenue, and Investment Arbiter loops. Under a success function defined by external BD, regulatory approval and launch, and revenue discipline, it achieved the highest automatic value-conversion score and was strongly preferred over the original baselines by value-specific blinded judges. Stress tests narrowed the claim: a stronger human baseline remained competitive, and a neutral judge did not show robust value-conversion dominance. Codex-only mechanistic ablations suggest that Revenue Room, Deal Room, and Approval Room carry useful work under the target objective. The central finding is objective-sensitive: departments may remain useful governance views, but the core AI-native operating primitive should be a shared, predictive asset-to-value state rather than a static human org chart. The study is dry-lab only and does not establish real-world drug success, clinical benefit, or revenue prediction accuracy.

Agentic AI systems are increasingly being deployed as productive resources in organizational workflows, yet existing evaluation methods primarily measure isolated technical performance rather than economic contribution. This paper introduces \emph{Agentomics}, a workflow-based framework for valuing, attributing, and pricing human and artificial agents. The framework models a workflow as a configuration of heterogeneous agents whose collective performance determines gross value, deployment cost, reliability, and expected failure loss. Workflow value is treated as a team-level quantity that may include complementarities, substitution effects, bottlenecks, and nonlinear production; additive stage-level value is only a special case. Building on this workflow model, the paper formulates AI deployment as a coalition-formation problem and defines coalition value as the incremental net surplus generated relative to a benchmark human workflow. The Shapley value is then used to attribute economic surplus among participating AI agents, yielding a principled connection among valuation, accountability, and market pricing. The resulting Shapley pricing equilibrium provides a normative benchmark for assessing whether agent prices reflect expected marginal contribution. A security-operations case study illustrates how the framework accounts for productivity gains, deployment costs, reliability losses, and coalition-level complementarities in hybrid human--AI workflows.

One of today's most pressing societal challenges is building AI systems whose behaviour, or the behaviour it enables within communities of interacting human and artificial agents, aligns with relevant human values. To address this challenge, we propose a formal computational framework for representing human values that provides the foundational structures required for value-aware reasoning in multi-agent systems. To our knowledge, this has not been attempted as yet, which is surprising given the growing volume of research integrating human values into AI systems. Taking as our starting point the wealth of research in human values from the field of social psychology, we set out to provide a formal model which captures value relations, value importance, and computational semantics in order to support the evaluation of behaviour with respect to values and the development of value-aware decision-making mechanisms in agent-based systems. We demonstrate how the model supports the evaluation of behaviour in terms of value alignment across a real-world scenario, establishing a bridge between abstract human values and concrete agent behaviour. We illustrate how our model captures key concepts from social psychology research and outline a roadmap for incorporating values as first-class constructs in multi-agent systems.