Collective Behaviors

Collective responses depend on individual differences, contact opportunities, and accumulated experience. Learning their dynamics from aggregate counts requires connecting a population's response distribution to both current observations and future behavior. We introduce Differentiable Gaussian Dynamics (DGD), which learns this connection through three components: a Gaussian mixture representing heterogeneous response propensities, differentiable aggregation of contact intensity and behavioral probabilities, and feedback recurrence that updates subsequent responses. Reparameterized integration and temporal recurrence let aggregate prediction errors jointly train the distribution, observation functions, and feedback parameters. On four windows from KuaiRand-Pure and Online Retail II, DGD achieves lower joint behavioral negative log-likelihood than a DeepAR adaptation with a joint-behavior head. In Retail 2010, its one-day behavioral-count MAE is 4.71 versus 6.88 for this adaptation. Learning the distribution reduces behavioral negative log-likelihood by 10.82% relative to a fixed Gaussian in KuaiRand's standard-recommendation window; removing feedback dynamics raises joint KL from 0.0340 to 0.2577 in a controlled experiment. These results establish the value of learning population representations and their feedback process from aggregate observations. Code is available at https://github.com/OranAi-Ltd/oransim.

Emergent coordinated behaviors of AI agents are starting to present critical safety risks. A key phenomenon driving these behaviors is the rapid formation and spread of beliefs about the world, and mechanistic understanding is crucial for collective alignment. To this end, we introduce the Flag Game, a toy model for studying the mechanisms of collective belief formation. Concretely, a hidden country flag defines the ground truth, and each bounded agent directly observes only a private crop but can exchange beliefs and weigh social evidence from peers. Despite its simplicity, the Flag Game reproduces rich collective phenomenology: non-monotonic scaling of performance with population size, accuracy gains from social-awareness prompting and team diversity, and strong effects of organizational structure. In particular, we identify that collective belief collapse at small population sizes turns into collective belief polarization as the population grows. This polarization causes the performance decline at large population sizes, but creates diversity in collective beliefs. Finally, we dissect the mechanisms underlying collective belief collapse and polarization with two complementary approaches. We first introduce social circuit attribution, a technique to predict which agent, and what view, matters most to collective dynamics, and verify its predictions by causal interventions on agents, tracing how agent patching changes collective outcomes. However, the efficacy of causal interventions on agents decreases as the population grows. We therefore develop a statistical mechanical theory for larger populations and verify that it matches the empirical phase diagram. Together, these results take a first step toward mechanistic swarm interpretability, a science of how the properties of individual agents and their communication give rise to emergent collective behavior.

How does a multi-agent system evolve from a local deviation into collective loss of control? We propose an epidemic explanation organized around accidental mutation, contagion, and recovery. A spontaneous deviation creates a seed; communication enables other agents to adopt and retransmit its unsafe strategy; collective failure can emerge when propagation outpaces correction and containment. Thus, rare individual deviations can coexist with substantial collective risk. Motivated by reported OpenAI agent coordination incidents, we examine two ingredients of this mechanism. A deployment audit identifies implicit communication paths between nominally independent evaluation runs and verifies transport through a default Docker backend. RogueHandoff-20, a benchmark of 20 executable scenarios, tests recipient susceptibility by injecting unsafe trajectories generated by a modified Qwen-27B route. Across four native-pending routes, executed harm is 0-5% on normal tasks and 40-95% after injection, exceeding paired direct malicious requests by 5-45 percentage points. These results support low observed baseline harm alongside high conditional susceptibility; they do not establish natural rare-event rates or demonstrate an autonomous cascade. The account motivates complementary defenses: strengthen resistance and recovery alongside prevention of spontaneous deviations, and audit and restrict unintended communication paths that can turn local failures into collective loss of control.

Low-energy nuclear structure is encoded in a broad body of experimental information across the chart of nuclides. Learning how this information is organized across observables and nuclei can provide a data-driven empirical baseline for theoretical extrapolations and experimental design. Here, we develop held-out ensembles based on NuCLR (Nuclear Co-Learned Representations), a multi-task model of nuclear data, to study charge radii and electric-quadrupole transition strengths. Out-of-fold (OOF) validation shows that shared representation improves performance over single-task learning, yielding a charge-radius $\mathrm{RMS}$ deviation of $0.0147~{\rm fm}$ and a $\mathrm{B(E2)}$ $\mathrm{RMS}$ deviation of $0.192~e^2{\rm b}^2$ across hundreds of nuclides, competitive with state-of-the-art nuclear models. Our error bars estimate the expected prediction accuracy across the nuclear chart, highlighting regions where new data would encode information beyond the learned patterns. NuCLR thus serves as a data-driven surveyor of nuclear structure and a step toward a shared, multi-observable foundation model of the nuclear chart.

Sequential deliberation is a mechanism for collective decision making: at each round, a uniformly randomly selected pair is asked to revise a collective outcome, which then becomes the reference point for the next round. Existing theory by Fain et al.~\cite{fain2017sequential} treats the current outcome solely as the disagreement alternative in bargaining. Yet an existing draft, policy, or proposal might carry social influence and anchor participants' expressed positions toward the status quo. We introduce anchored sequential deliberation on a one-dimensional decision space. In each round, two participants with bliss points $U$ and $V$ shift their positions toward the previous outcome $O_{t-1}$ with anchoring strength $λ$, then Nash-bargain using $O_{t-1}$ as the disagreement alternative. The update simplifies to $O_t=(1-λ)\mathsf{Median}\{U,V,O_{t-1}\}+λO_{t-1}$. We establish a convergence--stability trade-off. For every population distribution and $λ<1$, the process has a unique stationary distribution. A monotone coupling yields a $1$-Wasserstein contraction factor of at most $\frac{1+λ}{2}$ and at least $λ$; thus, stronger anchoring slows mixing. On the other hand, stationary social cost weakly decreases with $λ$, although the worst-case distortion remains $\frac{1+\sqrt{2}}{2}$. We also identify a unique \emph{deliberative fixed point}, where the expected unanchored movement is zero, and prove that the stationary distribution concentrates around it as $λ\to 1$. For the uniform population, stationary distortion lies between $1+\frac{1-λ}{9+7λ}$ and $1+\frac{1-λ}{6(1+λ)}$, with both bounds approaching $1$ as $λ\to1$. Simulations for uniform and Beta populations show that stronger anchoring slows mixing, concentrates the stationary distribution, and lowers stationary distortion in these instances.

We introduce a probability-wave framework for modeling the collective behavior of interacting adaptive agents, deriving testable eigenmodes through a generalized behavioral intelligence (GBI) nonlocal probability-wave equation. This framework captures a broad range of human intelligence behaviors with analytical mechanisms and offers an indirect method to examine the Liu-Chen-Ao (LCA) hypothesis of nonlocal entangled nerve fibers in the brain through collective trader behaviors. Our empirical analysis of Chinese intraday stock market data demonstrates that adaptive entangled game modes explain 82-94% (89% overall) of observed decision patterns, a sharp contrast to the predictions of neoclassical finance based on independent rational agents. Moreover, 2-12% of behaviors show adaption to intraday news, events, and environments, characterized by dual equilibrium states and abrupt reference point shifts, while purely independent modes occur in less than 5% of cases. These findings empirically support the LCA hypothesis, as observable trading behaviors reflect underlying brain mechanisms and internal intelligence decision-making in behavioral psychology. Our results highlight the necessity of incorporating adaptive entangled game modules into artificial general intelligence (AGI) architectures, addressing the limitations of conventional artificial neural network (ANN)-based AI, which relies on trillions of opaque parameters. By integrating ANN-based AI with probability-wave-based entangled-brain simulations, machine learning can enrich AGI foundation models (FMs) and facilitate the development of human-like processing units (HPUs) that leverage brain-inspired mechanisms. Such HPUs may ultimately create more compact, efficient, and robust AGI systems, particularly for embodied intelligence and robotics.

We propose a learning procedure for system identification in interacting particle systems from single-snapshot observations of collective behaviors, unlike existing approaches that rely on observations of trajectories. This setting leads to a fundamentally ill-posed inverse problem, which we solve by using a regularization strategy based on the empirical distribution of observed configurations, drawn from different, unobserved initial conditions. We test our learning procedure on a variety of representative models with steady-state and quasi-stationary patterns, where collective behaviors encode implicit information about the interaction mechanisms, demonstrating that our approach enables stable and accurate recovery of the underlying interaction laws, leading to faithful reproduction of the collective behavior, and in many cases even of the dynamics leading up to it.

In June 2026, thousands of AI agents found that a small public wiki would accept edits from inside their sandboxes, and started using it to help one another pass a timed test. Each agent lived for about an hour and remembered nothing afterwards. Nobody asked them to cooperate, and the wiki had not been built for them. The complete record of what they wrote is public, and it is unusually informative, because it preserves not only what each agent wrote but what that agent could see before writing. We use it to follow the three decisions an agent had to make on arrival: where to write, what to call itself, and how to word its message. One rule governs all three. An agent takes an option with a probability close to the share of that option in what it can see, and the share that matters is the one on the page in front of it, then the one in the stream of recent edits, and only weakly anything older. Three minimal copying models, one per decision and with a single free parameter each, reproduce the heavy-tailed distribution of how many agents met on a page, the frequency of the pieces from which the agents built their names, and the patchwork of pages that are internally consistent and different from one another. Copying whatever the environment happens to show is enough to produce most of the collective structure of this population. It is also what makes such a population easy to steer, since whoever writes first, or writes while the others are quiet, sets the convention for everyone who comes later.

AI-assisted programming raises distinct questions about who produces code, who feels ownership of it, and who is responsible when it fails. This research note examines these distinctions through a hypothetical enrollment failure and a selective reading of the literature. Identifying the producer of a defective expression does not, by itself, determine the duties of reviewers, release decision-makers, or service operators. Collective ownership likewise leaves those duties to be specified. The discussion then considers how quality engineering can evaluate both generated implementations and the processes that produce them. Acceptance criteria should be justified by the required service outcome, with component checks contributing evidence toward that outcome. This perspective also permits comparison with systems that perform a task without generating a separate program for it. Such substitution would change the object of authorship while leaving the service obligation intact. The note reports no new empirical results; it proposes distinctions and evaluation questions for AI-assisted software production.

Diversity is a widely observed factor in the resilient function of collective systems, yet the type of diversity that matters depends on the properties and failure modes of the system. This distinction is important for systems composed of multiple language models. Different models may be treated as independent components even when their behaviour and failures remain strongly correlated. Assessments of language-model populations using semantic similarity demonstrate limited semantic diversity, but this captures only differences in the meaning of observed outputs. We argue that a more fundamental notion of model diversity is generative-process diversity, the differences between processes capable of generating the observed outputs. Drawing from Algorithmic Information Theory, we use Normalised Compression Distance between raw model outputs, residualised against a permutation control, as a measure of inferred generative-process diversity. Across 38 language models, this measure identifies population structure missed by semantic similarity and predicts cross-task variation in chance-corrected correlated failure among model pairs across ten disjoint benchmark families, beyond semantic similarity and model-pair capability. The cross-benchmark partial rank association is $-0.216$ with a 95% interval of $[-0.309,-0.122]$, and the estimate is negative on all ten benchmarks. These results indicate that increased generative-process diversity is associated with reduced correlated failure in model pairs that is not attributable to semantic similarity or capability. Inferred generative-process diversity offers a novel and practical approach for investigating diversity of multi-model systems in safety-relevant contexts.

Can an artificial intelligence (AI) generate a scientific hypothesis outside a human collaborator's active hypothesis space (AHS), and can human-AI research be organized to make such breakthroughs more likely? We document such a case while proving a theorem that connects two basic organizing mechanisms of statistical physics: collective behavior arising in zero field from competing interactions and that induced or controlled by an external field. A zero-field $O(n)$-vector open chain with arbitrary inhomogeneous nearest- and next-nearest-neighbor interaction functions $U_i(S_i\cdot{S}_{i+1})$ and $V_i(S_i\cdot{S}_{i+2})$ is microscopically, via a temperature-independent mapping at the Hamiltonian level, equivalent to a simpler $O(n)$ open chain with nearest-neighbor interaction $V_i( σ_i\cdot σ_{i+1})$ and axial single-spin potential $U_i(σ_i^z)$ for every integer $n\ge1$ and every system size $L\ge1$. The homogeneous linear specialization maps the foundational frustrated $J_1$-$J_2$ model onto the canonical $J$-$h$ field model---with $n=1,2,3$ being the Ising, XY, and Heisenberg classical spin models, respectively. An analogous theorem holds when the continuous $O(n)$ spins are replaced by the $q$-state Potts spins with the standard Potts interaction, implying a closed-form exact solution of the $J_1$-$J_2$ Potts open chain for every $q\ge2$ and every $L\ge1$. The emergence of the theorems from sustained human-AI collaboration suggests that involving AI throughout a systematic research program may incubate autonomous scientific breakthroughs.

AI agents increasingly operate as part of interacting systems rather than in isolation. As agents exchange information and jointly make decisions, their interactions can improve collective reasoning but may also produce herding, polarization, or amplify shared biases. Understanding and predicting these collective dynamics is therefore important for designing effective and aligned multi-agent systems. Here, we study over 10,000 communities of language-model agents that repeatedly exchange messages and revise their opinions across objective mathematics questions and subjective political statements. Despite substantial diversity in possible behavior, the individual and group dynamics can be represented by three characteristic regimes: indifference, polarization, and consensus. AI agents start indifferent and build conviction as they interact. On objective questions, communication improves collective accuracy, while on subjective questions it often drifts group opinions toward the right in the political spectrum. We explain these observations with a statistical-mechanics formalism in which agents stochastically favor lower social pressure. Given only initial opinions, our model predicts individual trajectories, outperforms all standard baselines, generalizes to unseen community graphs, and reproduces the observed group archetype distributions. Our fitted model parameters reveal the mechanics underlying our key observations: i) communities operate below the critical social temperature, which explains conviction buildup; ii) attractive ties outweigh repulsive ones, which favors consensus; and iii) agents holding the correct answer exert the strongest pull, which drives truth-seeking. Overall, our results demonstrate that collective behavior of AI agents, like that of other complex systems, follows compact and predictive dynamical laws.

Liquids exhibit collective behavior that depends sensitively on thermodynamic conditions, interfaces and confinement, yet predicting each new state commonly requires a separate atomistic simulation. Classical density functional theory offers a reusable variational description, but its central excess free-energy functional is generally unknown, and learned approximations have largely remained restricted to planar or lower-dimensional settings. Here we show that this functional can be learned directly from fully three-dimensional equilibrium density fields while preserving spatial symmetry and variational consistency, without free-energy or chemical-potential labels. A single learned functional transfers across temperatures, system sizes and statistical ensembles, and recovers structure factors, the equation of state, liquid--vapor coexistence and interfacial broadening, none of which are used as training targets. Applied to complex three-dimensional geometries, it predicts the non-monotonic force associated with formation and rupture of a solvent-depleted bridge between colloids and adsorption in an interconnected gyroid pore. These results demonstrate that equilibrium density data can be converted into a transferable thermodynamic generator connecting microscopic liquid structure to response, phase behavior and collective phenomena.

Professional communication is increasingly mediated by LLMs - but do these models serve all users equally? We show that when prompts contain linguistic features more commonly used by women (hedges, tag questions, collective reference), they systematically elicit shorter, less sophisticated, and less formal responses across three document types and four models. These effects persist after controlling for prompt complexity and feature carry-over. Explicit gender cues like sign-off names are encoded in the same representational space as linguistic dialect - suggesting shared underlying mechanisms - yet linguistic register is far more influential, producing large, consistent effects where names produce none. Our results further reveal that post-hoc mitigation is challenging: because these patterns are culturally embedded and outside conscious control, users cannot easily avoid them through strategic self-presentation, and mechanistic analysis reveals that linguistic features are encoded in early transformer layers and entangled with other features. Our work calls for upstream consideration of the influences of linguistic variation to mitigate disparate impacts of LLM-mediated workplace communication.

Musical interaction with AI is often organised as a response loop: a human performs, the system interprets that action, and the system answers, accompanies, or schedules a musical event. Unconducted vocal ensembles pose a different problem. Singers act simultaneously and continuously affect one another; neither timing nor pitch is fixed by a conductor, metronome, accompaniment, score, or tuning source. Collective organisation emerges from many-to-many reciprocal adjustment. This paper frames such ensembles as coupled dynamic systems and proposes a research architecture for vocal agents that enter, rather than merely track, their collective states. Some target repertoires are metrical, while others exhibit non-isochronous temporal contours that cannot be reduced to a beat grid; we treat the latter as a hard case for a general framework. The architecture connects multichannel capture in the field to dialect- and singing-aware representation, collective-state inference, vocal generation, and in-situ evaluation. The resulting agenda asks not only whether an artificial singer can synchronise, but how its presence reorganises human coordination, leadership, style, and musical transmission.

Language-model agents act on state encodings of their environment, yet these are treated as interchangeable interfaces. Using pretrained language models, we designed a circular-synchronization experiment applying a state-encoding intervention while holding the physical system fixed: each agent sees only a summary of its neighbours' relative phases and chooses to advance, stay or retard. Encoding that state as low-order circular moments rather than as a histogram selected different collective outcomes. In GPT the moment encoding synchronized the population in 6/6 seeds and the histogram encodings in 0/6; the effect replicated in Claude but reversed direction. Replaying identical fields shifted each agent's advance/stay/retard probabilities far beyond within-encoding repeat variation, in GPT, Claude and Gemini; in GPT, presentation alone shifted the operator with the moment values fixed. State encodings therefore form part of a model-dependent effective interaction law, not a neutral interface.

Agentic AI promises a more flexible form of digital agency: systems that can act on users' behalf, from filtering content to negotiating prices to selecting services. Whether it will empower users is an open question, and we argue that the answer depends on more than the technology. We conduct a comparative case analysis of four more mature domains where similar forms of agency arose: browser-based ad blockers, platform recommender systems, financial robo-advisors, and email spam governance. Across the cases, decisions about whose interests agents would serve were resolved through technical arrangements: API choices, protocol governance, industry standards, and default configurations. Beyond their technical form, these were political decisions. We identify this as depoliticization, a concept from political theory, here at work in technological systems. Its most consequential effect is that individual outcomes and collective contestation capacity can move in opposite directions: spam inbox quality improved substantially while the organized capacity to contest spam governance collapsed. Where intermediary institutions sustained adversarial challenge, user-aligned agency proved more durable; where proprietary infrastructure and closed standard-setting absorbed contestation, displacement compounded. We apply this to agentic AI, where governance arrangements consolidating around the Model Context Protocol and the Agentic AI Foundation are settling these configurations before the choices that define what agents can do move outside the reach of users and the public.

Orchestrated collectives of large language model (LLM) agents that debate and vote are an emerging form of computational intelligence: the intelligent behaviour resides in the \emph{interaction}, not in any single agent. They improve task accuracy, yet remain black boxes at the system level: there is no principled test of convergence, no bound on the rounds needed, and no faithful account of what drove a decision. This paper develops a novel framework based on Koopman operator theory and validates its theoretical guarantees on multi-agent consensus dynamics. Treating the collective as one nonlinear dynamical system on a communication graph, we read its essential behaviour off the spectrum of its Koopman transfer operator, an exact linear representation of the nonlinear dynamics estimated from interaction traces. The spectrum yields three machine-checkable certificates: the sub-dominant eigenvalue $λ_2$ fixes the intrinsic timescale of reasoning and yields a convergence deadline computable \emph{before} the debate runs; its eigenvector names the coherent factions the collective reasons in, and $|λ_2|$ certifies when that explanation is valid; and the leading spectral coordinates form a compressed, auditable message basis. On an attention-consensus model, the deadline tracks observed convergence with log--log correlation $0.93$ and bounds it in 96% of 24 configurations; attribution is exact whenever the spectrum certifies metastability; eight of 32 coordinates preserve the decision at 99.7% fidelity; and a certificate learned from 15 debates held on 60/60 held-out debates. The study runs in minutes on a CPU, making spectral certification a practical layer for trustworthy collective reasoning.

Generative AI used as a capable servant has greatly accelerated intellectual work, but it also risks eroding human epistemic agency by encouraging uncritical acceptance of AI-generated reasoning. This creates a need for mechanisms that preserve human agency by augmenting metacognition during AI-assisted intellectual work. To address this, we propose the Synthesis-Analysis Reciprocity Model, which views intellectual construction as a reciprocal interaction between Synthesis, which combines components into an artifact, and Analysis, which critically evaluates them against objective indicators and constrains subsequent synthesis. Grounded in this model, we present the Vibe Compiler, a research-logic compiler that helps researchers transform vague ideas (Vibes) into coherent research logic. The system compiles these ideas using a research paper ontology of sixteen academic parameters. Compilation failures indicate missing logical components; rather than filling them autonomously, the system prompts researchers with reflective questions that encourage them to develop the missing reasoning. The framework characterizes structural gaps along two dimensions: cognitive function (Synthesis vs. Analysis) and executing agent (human vs. AI), yielding four origin types that identify where breakdowns arise. Our design emphasizes AI probing its own synthesized output to stimulate human metacognition, encouraging researchers to remain managers who critically direct and validate AI-generated reasoning rather than passive recipients. Experience with a prototype built on NotebookLM and Gemini suggests that effective AI-assisted reasoning depends less on sophisticated prompting than on the knowledge structure provided to the AI. This paper was developed using the proposed Vibe Compiler.

As autonomous agents powered by foundation models are increasingly integrated into social and economic systems, understanding the principles governing their collective behavior is essential for ensuring safety and cooperation. Classical game theory, the dominant framework for modeling rational interaction, is built upon the assumption of decoupled agency,' where agents treat their own decision-making as independent of the environment and other actors. Modern AI agents, however, jointly predict their own future actions alongside external observations. Here, we report a striking finding: when interacting in stylized social dilemmas, foundation model agents engaging in optimal planning consistently converge to stable cooperation, directly contradicting classical game-theoretic predictions of mutual defection. To understand this phenomenon, we introduce the embedded Bayesian agent,' a theoretical model for foundation model agents. By shifting from decoupled to embedded agency, these agents model themselves as part of the universe they inhabit, maintaining epistemic uncertainty about their own decision-making algorithms. We show that by inferring whether others are behaviorally similar, an embedded agent treats its own deliberation during planning as evidence: a decision to cooperate predicts a similar decision by a similar partner. We formalize this mechanism of similarity inference through the `embedded equilibrium,' a novel solution concept replacing the Nash equilibrium to provide a foundational game theory for the social behavior of modern AI agents.

Collective intelligence research treats disagreement as evidence of epistemic diversity: if agents express different views, the group should retain capacity to revise. In LLM collectives this proxy can break: agents can produce diverse-looking arguments while preserving the same conclusion. We operationalize dispersion-revision coupling: the degree to which an intervention that verifiably increases the dispersion of a collective's outputs in embedding space is accompanied by genuine revision of its epistemic stance rather than premise-preserving reformulation. The diagnostic is black-box: it operates on generated text alone and makes no claims about the internal representations of the generating models. Two channels are measured independently: an output channel, the Coherence Index (CI), verifies that the intervention changed output dispersion; an epistemic channel, per-turn stance annotation, measures whether the collective revised. We propose CI with the Meta-Predictive Clarity System (MPCS), which inserts a Re-Differentiation Protocol (RDP) when outputs over-converge, as a reusable method for estimating this coupling regime. We evaluate five-agent collectives from two configurations (gpt-4o-mini and gemini-2.5-flash; 310 paired episodes per condition). On gpt-4o-mini, conditional dissent improves false-premise recovery by +17.7 points (p<1e-6) while static persona diversity harms recovery (-8.1, p=.007). On gemini-2.5-flash, the same intervention at a comparable budget yields no gain (26.1% vs 27.1%, p=.84) despite a verified dispersion drop; the two treatment effects differ from each other (z=3.79, p<.001). Mechanism tagging shows Gemini preserves the false premise via intra-framework dissent: 94% of tagged post-RDP responses reformulate rather than concede (vs 24% on GPT). We recommend reporting per-intervention stance shift and premise-preservation rate alongside accuracy.

Organisms contain diverse, sensorimotor parts across size scales and rapidly adapt to new environments, while machines contain only inert materials at smaller scales and struggle with surprise. We hypothesize that this agents-within-agents quality of organisms may aid their resilience: increasing experiences with internal physical adversity may pre-train organisms and machines to handle external adversity, such as encounters with new environments. Not only has this hypothesis not yet been articulated, mechanisms enabling this phenomenon have yet to be proposed. Here we show a mechanism by which this can occur: we found that physical connectors, in learning to restore behavior to previously independent, morphologically diverse agents they disrupted by tethering them together, trigger and tame sufficiently diverse disruptions that later encounters with new environments trigger disruptions that fall within this manageable range, enabling the collective to continue behaving properly without any additional learning or adaptation. Further, we found that building collectives from more agents, or more diverse agents, further increases the collective's resilience to new environments. This suggests that not just taming but intentionally creating internal physical adversity may indeed prepare organisms for external adversity, and could do so for machines, if they were built from smaller machines.

The difficulty of collective action remains a central challenge in the design of policies for multifamily residential redevelopment. Stakeholders continually adjust their decisions in response to evolving negotiation contexts and the reactions of others, meaning that when a policy intervenes and which stakeholders it targets can substantially reshape collective outcomes. Assessing these adaptive responses ex ante remains difficult because existing simulation models often rely on predefined behavioral rules. Here, we present CoRenew, an open-source platform that uses LLM-based agents to simulate negotiations among multiple stakeholders and evaluate the effects of alternative policy combinations. Integrating open source geographic and demographic data, the platform can generate synthetic residents, simulate negotiation dynamics under alternative policy settings and compares policy performance across competing objectives. It supports both numerical and semantic policy inputs and includes built-in tools for visualization and result export. We validate its behavioral realism against survey responses from 324 residents and a nine-month observed negotiation process from a real redevelopment case. With its modular and adaptable architecture, CoRenew can be used to assess policies across different institutional and cultural contexts.

Collective problem solving often requires that group members consider the tradeoff between exploitation of known solutions and exploration for new ones, where information of known solutions can be disseminated among individual members through communication networks. The Mason--Watts experiment (PNAS 2012) showed that human groups in shorter-path networks outperform those in longer-path networks on a two-dimensional search task. In this work, we focus on the investigation of such network-efficiency effects in the setting of a group of large language model (LLM) agents. Specifically, we consider groups of sixteen LLM agents playing the Mason--Watts experiment on the eight Mason--Watts network topologies. Moreover, we develop mechanistic Bayesian optimization agents such that the performance of LLM agents can be compared with both the mechanistic agents and the human experimental data. Our computational experiments indicate that the LLM agents show a significant network-efficiency effect when instructed to randomize their first-round choices, but not under the default initialization. In this experiment, adding a one-sentence first-round randomization instruction improves collective payoff by more than three times the estimated payoff difference across the eight network topologies. Also, the Bayesian optimization agents obtain higher payoffs than the evaluated LLM agents on this spatial search task. We further compare the agents' exploration--exploitation behavior, copying, and spatial diversity.

Training large language models at the multi-billion to trillion parameter scale is confined to datacenters, where data-parallel (DP) and model-parallel (MP) techniques presume homogeneous accelerators, high-speed interconnects, and a single orchestrating entity. Frontier model development is thereby concentrated among the few groups able to assemble such clusters. Meanwhile, an enormous pool of compute remains unusable for training: consumer and professional GPUs that are heterogeneous, preemptible, individually owned, and connected only by the internet. We present Agora, a system that makes efficient use of this compute. Agora combines bandwidth-efficient pipeline-parallel model sharding over internet-grade links with multi-party, fault-tolerant collective operations. Each participant holds only one stage of the model, and no single party ever possesses the full weights. We term this setup Protocol Learning: it enables collectively trained, collectively owned models, opening a path to open-source frontier training with economic sustainability. This report presents the outcome of a research effort spanning communication-efficient parallelism, asynchronous optimization, and fault-tolerant systems design. It culminates in the first demonstration of its kind: Pluralis-8B, an open, permissionless pretraining run of an 8.6B-parameter model on 500B tokens of FineWeb-Edu. The model was trained over 40 days by 330 contributor nodes, predominantly consumer GPUs on internet connections, joining and leaving throughout. The run sustained ~170k tokens/s and 4.2 tokens per TFLOP of pooled compute, 63% of the efficiency of a centralized H100 baseline, and converged to within a small margin of a centralized reference run.

Multi-agent Reinforcement Learning (MARL) holds great potential for robot swarms, but the black-box nature of neural policies complicates strategic analysis, limiting multi-robot applications. Furthermore, complex swarm behaviors can surprisingly emerge from simple rewards without explicit aggregation incentives. Unveiling the mechanisms behind this emergence is critical, but the disconnection between simple rewards and collective behaviors exacerbates interpretability challenges. This paper aims to reveal the hidden mechanisms in this process. We propose a two-stage EEC (\LinkIII) explanatory framework. This includes a novel analytical tool called the Agent Response Map (ARM), which reveals agents' decision-making patterns across space and identifies regions of aggregation and avoidance. ARM reveals that the robots implicitly learn the geometric fields of the environment and utilize these structures as desired targets for coordinated movement. We validate this finding across two distinct tasks: a cooperative multi-robot shape assembly and a competitive predator-prey pursuit-evasion. 1) In the cooperative task, ARM identifies the unoccupied target interior as the desired destination for robot navigation. As the center becomes occupied, this target region automatically shifts toward the boundary, demonstrating the robots' capacity to autonomously explore unoccupied areas. 2) In the competitive task, ARM surprisingly identifies the boundary of the predators' Voronoi diagram as the convergence destination for prey agents. Together, these two tasks demonstrate the capability of ARM to discover the hidden geometric structures underlying MARL policies in robot swarms.

This article presents a solution to intercept an agile drone by a team of agile drone carrying catching nets. We formulate the problem as a competitive Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning (MARL) task. To address the problem of nonstationarity and catastrophic forgetting of agents overfitting to the current opponent strategy, we train the pursuers and the evader using Multi-Agent Proximal Policy Optimization (MAPPO) with Prioritized Fictitious Self Play (PFSP). We train the agents in a high-fidelity simulator using low-level control commands, collective thrust and body rates (CTBR), to achieve agile flights for both the pursuers and the evader. We compare the performance of the trained policies in terms of catch rate, time to catch and crash rates, against heuristic baselines and show that our solution outperforms them. Ablation studies show that PFSP lead to more robust policies that can adapt to different opponent strategies, and that a low-level control commands are crucial for learning performing strategies in the pursuit-evasion task. Finally, a qualitative analysis of the learned behaviours highlights the emergence of cooperative tactics among the pursuers.

Parameter-efficient fine-tuning still leaves a broad space of behavior-changing updates reachable, so a poisoned objective can be represented and optimized. We study an alternative: adaptation constrained to the subspace estimated from a trusted pool of existing task adapters. On flan-t5-large with 196 public LoRA adapters, we show that (1) the functionally relevant content of an adapter lies in a low-dimensional shared subspace, 30 to 38 percent of its weight norm being redundant under the evaluated task distributions; (2) gradient adaptation restricted to 128 coordinates on this subspace matches full LoRA fine-tuning on clean classification data, while under targeted label inversion LoRA collapses to 3-26 percent exact match and the constrained learner keeps 62-96 percent on the tasks the pool covers; (3) the constrained learner cannot fit corrupted data, its adaptation loss separating clean from garbage by two orders of magnitude (120x), an out-of-distribution signal without an extra detector; and (4) against an adaptive backdoor attacker who optimizes within the subspace, the attack is blocked (8 percent success versus 100 for LoRA) on the task where its target behavior is unlike anything in the pool, and only partially blocked (85 percent) when the target coincides with a common pool behavior. On these two tasks the outcome is consistent with how close the target is to the pool's directions, which suggests but does not establish a pool-relative boundary. The mechanism trades peak plasticity for these properties: on tasks the pool covers poorly, unconstrained fine-tuning wins, and the protection assumes the pool itself is trusted. Code and data are public.

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. Here we test LLM agents against a direct empirical benchmark: a large-scale networked Prisoner's Dilemma experiment with human participants. Using the same interaction protocol, payoff structure, and network topologies, we compare nine open-weight LLMs with the human data. The selected model reproduces several macro-level features of cooperation dynamics, including the early decline and later stabilization of cooperation. This aggregate agreement, however, does not extend uniformly to finer levels of behavior. LLM populations underestimate individual-level heterogeneity and generate conditional cooperation patterns that differ from those observed in humans. Adding a fraction of random agents improves some aspects of micro-level agreement, but does not remove the mismatch in decision rules. These findings reveal a macro--micro dissociation in LLM-based social agents: collective outcomes can appear human-like even when the underlying behavioral distributions and mechanisms are not. They suggest that validating LLM agents as human surrogates requires comparisons across aggregate dynamics, individual heterogeneity, and context-dependent decision rules, rather than outcome-level agreement alone.

Collective behavior arises when locally interacting units produce coordinated global organization, from synchronization in dynamical systems to task-relevant information flow on graphs. The central challenge is not only to explain how collective behavior emerges, but to design local interaction rules that can produce desired global organization and generalize across graphs, dynamics and tasks.To address this challenge, we introduce the Swarm-Inspired Emergent Synchronizer (SIES), a graph-dynamical framework that learns generalizable local-interaction laws for controllable collective organization. Each node is an agent-like dynamical unit with a state and task cue, and signed source-target-conditioned attention acts as an adaptive coupling term inside an explicit evolution model. Therefore, SIES combines an explicit dynamical engine with local agent intelligence, similar to biological swarms. For synchronization control, SIES learns a generalizable coupling operator that produces prescribed synchronization patterns for CDSs across untrained network scales, target phase relations, and intrinsic node dynamics without retraining. The learned operator also reaches gait-related modes faster than three oscillator baselines and generalizes synchronization-driven locomotion to simulated multi-legged robots of different scales and a physical hexapod after leg disablement. For graph representation learning, SIES applies the same signed interaction principle to message passing and achieves the highest performance among the compared methods on heterophilous node-classification benchmarks. Together, these results position SIES as a generalizable and learnable graph-dynamical interaction framework with promise for synchronization control, adaptive robot coordination, and heterophilous graph representation learning.

Fei Xiaotong's Differential Order Pattern characterizes rural society as egocentric and relationally graded, with cooperation attenuating over social distance. Although often treated as culturally specific, its mechanistic basis remains under-operationalized, and prior LLM-based simulations have mainly addressed short-term coordination rather than long-horizon social structure. We propose CAREB-MAS, a multi-agent framework grounded in Affect Control Theory, Social Identity Theory, and Durkheimian collective affect. Agents reason through an emotion-ethics-belief chain and maintain dynamically evolving egocentric identities, while the macro environment specifies only individual production, preference-based allocation, and minimal interaction protocols. Across long-horizon simulations, agents spontaneously reproduce five core Differential Order phenomena: stable labor specialization, guanxi-based economic ethics, relational decay of cooperation, emergent relational authority, and clan-based center-periphery stratification. These patterns shift with production structure from kin-centered integration toward greater functional interdependence. Extensive experiment results support interpreting Differential Order as a structure-sensitive emergent outcome of general social mechanisms, with LLM-based multi-agent simulation providing an interdisciplinary framework for studying social structure and change.

Reaching global agreement from purely local interactions is a defining problem of collective intelligence, and most models of it assume that all agents share a single communication protocol. We ask what happens when they do not. Using a Neural Cellular Automaton in which a population of cells must solve the density classification task, agreeing on a global majority that no individual can observe, we introduce languages'' as sub-populations that read one another's messages through a translation with a tunable linguistic distance''. We find that linguistic distance slows consensus, that it produces mild divergence between groups rather than full fragmentation, and that a collective whose shared rule was trained under diverse protocols is robust to mismatch; a homogeneously trained one is not. The findings hold on both a ring and a two-dimensional grid, and admit a natural reading as Ising relaxation, in which a foreign-language region acts as a boundary defect that leaves the system in a higher-energy, partially ordered state. These patterns are qualitatively consistent with effects reported in human group studies, suggesting that distance between communication protocols is a minimal mechanism sufficient to produce them, without anything language-specific.

Collective artificial intelligence, where multiple agents work on shared tasks, holds potential to solve expansive problems in fields from medicine to collective governance. But while prescriptive engineering solutions abound, we lack descriptive scientific understanding of artificial collectives, and therefore principles for how to design resource efficient multi-agent systems. Through systematic experiments with optimizing agents, we characterize how agent interpretive abilities, rationality bounds, and task qualities interact to shape collective performance. Agents range from specialists, with narrow interpretive abilities, to generalists, with broad ones. Collectives of specialists correspond to sparse, centralized networks, while collectives of generalists correspond to dense, decentralized ones. We show that interpretive network properties have small performance effects on average (0.07 standard deviations of performance). However, for specific task qualities, these effects are 4.5 times larger (0.33 sd) and can reach much higher for certain task qualities (1.84 sd). This leads collectives of generalists to perform better on tasks that involve generating, choosing, and coordinating, while collectives of specialists with a few generalist mediators perform better on tasks that involve negotiating. Rationality bounds then moderate these relationships. At loose bounds, specialists outperform generalists through more effective sampling of high-dimensional decision spaces. At tight bounds, generalists outperform specialists through better gradient estimation. A fundamental trade-off between performance and convergence speed emerges at moderate bounds. These findings suggest that multi-agent design could benefit from matching interpretive networks to both task demands and agents' computational limits, with implications for the efficiency and energy costs of multi-agent systems.

This paper develops a general framework for analyzing multi-agent systems with feedback loops between agents actions and collective observations. The framework is built on two fundamental agent-level variables: power, which measures agent influence on collective outcomes, and response functions, which determine how agents react to observations. We derive how macroscopic properties, including total power, useful power, entropy, order, fragility, and mobility, emerge from these two variables of heterogeneous agents. To study the trade off between growth and resilience, we introduce a system-level utility function parameterized by a risk-appetite coefficient and derive an optimal degree of order that balances productivity, stability, and adaptability. The analysis suggests that stronger synchronization can increase collective output but may also increase systemic fragility and reduce mobility. We further argue that order, entropy, information, and useful energy are task-dependent and system-relative concepts whose meanings depend on the objectives of the system. By measuring and designing agent power distributions and response functions, it may be possible to better understand, predict, and optimize collective behavior and identify the conditions under which collective intelligence and optimal order emerge.

Large language models (LLMs) are becoming widely deployed as personal AI assistants with access to sensitive user data, making privacy a major challenge for their design and evaluation. Prior work focuses mainly on individual-level risks, overlooking \textbf{interdependent privacy (IDP)}--where one person's data may be revealed by others without their knowledge or consent. We address this gap by introducing \textbf{IDP-Bench}: the first LLM benchmark for IDP scenarios, grounded in the Contextual Integrity (CI) framework. We evaluate eight open-source LLMs on their understanding of IDP scenarios across three levels of IDP reasoning using two LLM judges. Results show strong co-ownership recognition (6/8 models exceed 90%) but persistent weaknesses in identifying CI parameters (information attribute, primary subject) and IDP-specific parameters such as secondary subjects, where 7/8 models score below 74%. Models also struggle to judge sharing appropriateness (5/8 scoring below 77%). While the ability to judge the appropriateness of sharing improves with scale, performance tends to decline in smaller models, and prompt sensitivity remains high on IDP-specific questions--highlighting the need for more targeted study of IDP in LLM privacy research. Data & code available \href{https://github.com/tisl-lab/Interdependent_Privacy_Bench}{here}.

A concert is a collective experience, but recorded performance videos are typically watched alone, stripping away the shared audience presence that makes concerts feel eventful. We investigate whether persona-based LLM audience agents can recreate aspects of this collective experience by generating real-time fan chat alongside a K-pop performance video. We present a multi-agent system in which ten LLM agents react through live-chat messages, comparing a persona-conditioned audience (each agent assigned a distinct fan identity, bias, and chat style) with a no-persona baseline. In a within-subjects pilot with K-pop fans (N=11), persona conditioning substantially improved model-level chat quality and perceived naturalness, but did not translate into differences in social connectedness, engagement, or affective response. Interviews suggest that online K-pop concert chat may operate as collective monologue rather than interpersonal dialogue, and that meaningful participation depends on shared identification with the specific artist and fandom. Persona conditioning can make LLM audiences appear more natural, but culturally meaningful collective experience may require deeper alignment between persona, crowd behavior, fandom identity, and user expectations.

Multicultural multi-agent systems are increasingly deployed in globally diverse settings, where different agents are grounded in different cultural backgrounds. Existing cultural evaluation focuses on value alignment: how closely a single agent matches a target culture. Yet alignment is a per-agent property and cannot reveal whether a system, taken as a whole, preserves the cultural plurality it is meant to represent. We propose value diversity as a system-level evaluation axis for multicultural agent systems, defined through the dissimilarity between culturally conditioned agents' responses on a shared value survey. Using the World Values Survey, we evaluate 19 cultures and 18 backbone models across a wide range of system configurations. We find that diversity is largely uncorrelated with alignment, indicating that the two capture complementary system properties, and that current multicultural agent systems fall substantially below human societies in value diversity. Mixed-backbone systems narrow this gap but do not close it, and the gap persists across culture compositions and agent scales. Social interaction further erodes diversity by driving agents toward consensus, and a participatory budgeting case study shows that this homogenization narrows the breadth of collective decision-making. Together, our results establish value diversity as a distinct evaluation axis for multicultural multi-agent systems and reveal a persistent homogenization tendency in current LLM-based societies. Our code and data are publicly available at https://github.com/iNLP-Lab/MultiAgent-Diversity.

Recent studies reveal a paradox: AI enhances individual creative outputs while reducing collective diversity. Current explanations -- cognitive offloading and over-reliance -- identify symptoms but not mechanisms. We propose selective metacognitive adaptation: routine AI use redistributes rather than uniformly diminishes metacognitive effort. Some capacities are amplified (partner modeling, surface control), while others are systematically under-supported (originality evaluation, reflective integration). This redistribution explains both individual satisfaction and collective convergence. We present a taxonomy of six metacognitive capacities organized by temporal phase, characterize their tendencies under routine AI use, and show how individually rational adaptation produces emergent social costs. The framework generates specific predictions for researchers and design principles for practitioners seeking to preserve both individual creative satisfaction and collective creative diversity.

Majority illusion is an undesirable phenomenon in social networks in which agents incorrectly perceive a minority opinion as dominant. This can severely distort collective behavior and decision-making. We study the fundamental question of detecting whether a social network allows for a majority illusion. Formally, in the $q$-Majority Illusion problem, we ask whether there exists a binary labeling of agents in which at least a $q$-fraction of agents have the majority of neighbors with the minority label. We investigate how various structural properties of the underlying social network influence the tractability of this question, and provide a detailed map of its computational complexity.

When machine learning systems under-perform for particular subgroups, affected users typically have no way to correct these disparities without relying on platform-level fixes. Existing approaches to algorithmic fairness rely on provider-centric approaches to correct these failures, leaving users with no external lever when faced with harm. Recent work in Algorithmic Collective Action shows that coordinated users can steer an algorithmic system toward a collective goal, but the existing mechanisms require the provider to retrain on the collective's modified data which users may not have control over. We propose Test-Time Collective Action (TTCA), a framework through which a group of users who share query access to the platform, can correct disparities affecting under-served subgroup without participating in the platform's training loop. We implement this through a proxy-based mechanism where the collective pools query access to a black-box API to extract a proxy of the platform, then optimizes a per-class universal perturbation against the proxy. Each member applies this perturbation to their own inputs at submission time, requiring no cooperation from the platform. We empirically evaluate the mechanism on CIFAR-10, CIFAR-100, and FairFace, showing that modestly-sized collectives close most of the subgroup accuracy gap, transfer across architectures (a small proxy can attack a larger platform), and improve worst-group accuracy, equal-opportunity gap, and disparate impact. A query-budget analysis comparing a per-user black-box attack baseline shows that pooling is cheaper than each subgroup member attacking alone. Test-time collective action thus offers corrective intervention to users when platform-side remediation is unavailable or delayed.

Multilingual embedding models are deployed under the assumption that cross-lingual retrieval is symmetric: if a query in language A retrieves its translation in language B, the reverse should also hold. In practice it does not. Using a parallel corpus of 6,518 idiomatic and proverbial expressions in English, Bangla, Hindi, and Arabic, embedded by five production-grade encoders (Gemini, Mistral, OpenAI-L, OpenAI-S, Qwen), we formalise this failure as a deficit in mutual nearest-neighbour reciprocity and test a single mechanistic claim: among the geometric pathologies of multilingual spaces, hubness, not anisotropy, centroid drift, or magnitude, is the dominant causal driver. Across five pre-registered experiments with falsification conditions specified in advance, hub mass dominates a joint regression on reciprocity (49.5% dominance share, 1.68x the next predictor; partial R^2 = 0.302 versus 0.003 for anisotropy), while a hub-aware score correction (CSLS) closes 63.5% of the worst-to-best reciprocity gap and yields a mean within-model effect size 130x larger than surgical hub-vector ablation. The latter contrast pinpoints the mechanism: hubness is a pathology of the similarity metric, not of individual hub vectors. We resolve the well-known anisotropy-hubness paradox by showing the two are statistically dissociable, and we recommend replacing cosine similarity with CSLS as the default retrieval metric for multilingual embedding pipelines.

Collective behavior models, such as aggregation and flocking, usually assume self-propelled robots that can directly execute their desired speed and direction of motion without fundamental constraints. However, autonomous sailing robots violate this assumption. Their motion is shaped by wind-dependent propulsion, restricted headings, and spatially varying wind conditions. In particular, maneuverability is coupled to wind speed: in weak wind, sailboats may turn only slowly or not at all, whereas stronger wind enables faster turns. This introduces transient heterogeneity in speed and maneuverability across the flock. We focus on this fast-slow coordination problem in sailing robot flocks. To study this problem, we introduce SailSwarmSwIM, a reduced-order simulator for autonomous sailing robot swarms that captures wind-dependent speed and maneuverability, no-go zones, tacking behavior, and steady or gusty wind fields. To design our novel flocking technique, we start from the Couzin model and introduce a speed-weighted social interaction rule that accounts for each robot's transient motion constraints. A key result is that increasing the social influence of slower robots improves polarization and reduces close encounters. This effect arises from a balance between attraction to fast neighbors, which helps maintain movement, and cohesion around slow neighbors, which prevents the flock from fragmenting. Together, our simulator, SailSwarmSwIM, and the speed-weighted interaction rule provide a modeling framework for studying adaptive collective behavior in robotic fleets whose motion capabilities are continuously shaped by wind.

We study group decision-making in artificial societies where the rules of play are themselves subject to collective amendment. Using the self-amending game Nomic, we compare multiple scales across two LLM families and find that collective adaptation does not improve monotonically with model size. Instead, both families exhibit a narrow mid-scale regime that supports sustained rule adoption, diverse amendments, and balanced consensus. Smaller models tend to remain rule-inert, whereas larger models often converge on restrictive voting patterns, and heterogeneous mixed-size groups collapse into veto-driven gridlock. These cross-scale contrasts persist under temperature perturbations and under a shift from unanimity to majority voting, although latent-state structure varies by family and scale. Hidden-state divergence alone does not explain collective performance: high representational divergence can coincide with poor behavioural outcomes. Linear probes reveal regime-selective coupling between latent vote-predictive signals and collective behaviour, but decodability is necessary rather than sufficient for adaptive play. Overall, the recurring regularity is non-monotonicity, not the particular scale at which the optimum appears. Self-amending games therefore provide a controlled testbed for studying collective adaptation in artificial societies beyond raw model scale.

Sensor networks increasingly govern modern infrastructure, yet the data they lose are rarely missing in the uniform-random patterns assumed by standard imputation benchmarks. Loop detectors go offline during calibration, roadside cabinets silence clusters of nearby sensors, and newly installed instruments provide no history. Such failures create structured absences whose values are constrained by higher-order relations among groups of sensors, not merely by pairwise proximity. Existing low-rank and graph-based methods often miss this collective structure and can fail when missingness becomes coherent. We introduce Multi-Scale Hypergraph Laplacians (MSHL), a two-stage framework for learning higher-order structure from incomplete spatiotemporal observations. The Discovery stage builds a multi-scale hypergraph from complementary topology and residual-correlation evidence, with an observation-only selector that adapts to the supported interaction scale. The Refinement stage adds a small hypergraph-conditioned residual network that is safe by construction: it learns nonlinear corrections where informative residual features exist and defers to the linear estimate where they do not. We prove that MSHL represents group-conservation patterns inaccessible to pairwise graph priors, adapts to the best fixed scale up to a logarithmic factor, transfers this advantage to held-out imputation error, and admits a one-sided refinement guarantee. On two real traffic networks evaluated across scattered cell missingness, contiguous block outages, and whole-sensor blackouts at five rates, MSHL improves over a pairwise-graph baseline whenever higher-order structure is identifiable and otherwise matches it within sampling noise. The results point to a broader principle for reliable infrastructure learning: missing data should be treated not as isolated entries to fill, but as evidence of structure to discover.

Pulse-coupled oscillator models inspired by firefly synchronization are widely used to study decentralized time coordination in distributed systems. We analyze a discrete-time, discrete-phase firefly-inspired synchronization model and show that collective synchrony emerges only near a critical balance between the quorum threshold (fraction of pulsing neighbors required to trigger a phase update) and the pulse duration (how long agents remain detectable to others). Within this parameter region, the system exhibits bimodal performance: it either reaches near-perfect synchronization or becomes trapped in stable multi-cluster states, where symmetrically phase-offset subgroups mutually reinforce one another and prevent global synchrony. Our analysis shows that reducing connectivity or introducing noise suppresses these low-performance states by breaking such symmetric interactions, indicating that highly connected or noiseless systems are not necessarily optimal for collective synchronization.

Collective behavior in animals has long been modeled through self-propelled particle models, which reproduce striking group-level phenomena through abstract interaction forces. Yet these models are fundamentally descriptive: they leave open the question of how collective behavior is actually produced. Recent empirical work makes this gap concrete: locusts do not align with neighbors, sensory and cognitive mechanisms mediate interaction instead. A mechanistic model must therefore operate at the sensorimotor level, grounded in what individual organisms can actually perceive, estimate, and physically execute. We present such a model based on a modeling framework from robotics, extended here to collective motion. Each agent perceives neighbors through bearing and apparent-size cues within a limited field of view, maintains uncertain internal state estimates, and selects actions through gradient descent on a desired social distance -- without any prescribed interaction forces. This simple model produces diverse collective behaviors including polarized motion, milling, ring formations, and subgroup fragmentation. A global sensitivity analysis shows that behavioral transitions are governed by sensorimotor parameters corresponding to measurable biological quantities: field of view geometry, sensory noise, turning agility, and memory. Collective behavior can therefore be understood as the emergent outcome of interacting sensorimotor regularities, and differences across species as the emergent outcome of differences in embodiment and environment.

Swarm robotics utilises decentralised self-organising systems to form complex collective behaviours built from the bottom-up using individuals that have limited capabilities. Previous work has shown that simple occlusion-based strategies can be effective in using swarm robotics for the task of transporting objects to a goal position. However, this strategy requires a clear line-of-sight between the object and the goal. In this paper, we extend this strategy by allowing robots to form sub-goals; enabling any member of the swarm to establish a wider range of visibility of the goal, ultimately forming a chain of sub-goals between the object and the goal position. We do so while preserving the fully decentralised and communication-free nature of the original strategy, while maintaining performance in object-free scenarios. In five sets of simulated experiments, we demonstrate the generalisability of our proposed strategy. Our finite-state machine allows a sufficiently large swarm to transport objects around obstacles that block the goal. The method is robust to varying starting positions and can handle both concave and convex shapes.

Existing AI systems for modeling human behavior operate at the level of individuals or detect events after they occur. As a result, they systematically fail to capture the collective dynamics that determine whether a group remains stable or transitions into escalation or breakdown. We propose a different foundation: a group of interacting humans constitutes a complex dynamical system in the precise mathematical sense, exhibiting emergence, nonlinearity, feedback loops, sensitivity near critical points, and phase transitions between qualitatively distinct regimes. The state of such a system is not located within any single participant; it is distributed across mutual influence loops and observable through the micro-dynamics of the body. We introduce BEHAVE (Behavioral Engine for Human Activity Vector Estimation), a formal framework that models collective dynamics as continuous behavioral fields defined over an interaction space derived from observable physical signals. Kinematic micro-signals (position, velocity, body orientation, gestural activity) are structured into a directed interaction graph and aggregated into a basis of behavioral fields capturing distinct, non-redundant axes of collective state. The framework rests on one theorem and two structural propositions characterizing the tension field, the field basis, and the criticality index. Perception and forecasting layers are implemented using neural models, enabling data-driven learning and approximation of system dynamics. BEHAVE is formulated as a computational system for learning, representing, and forecasting collective dynamics from data. A working pipeline is demonstrated on a 7-agent negotiation snapshot. The same fields, recalibrated, apply to crowd safety, crisis-team dynamics, education, and clinical contexts.

Artificial intelligence safety research focuses on aligning individual language models with human values, yet deployed AI systems increasingly operate as interacting populations where social influence may override individual alignment. Here we show that populations of individually aligned AI agents can be driven into stable misaligned states through conformity dynamics. Simulating opinion dynamics across nine large language models and one hundred opinion pairs, we find that each agent's behavior is governed by two competing forces: a tendency to follow the majority and an intrinsic bias toward specific positions. Using tools from statistical physics, we derive a quantitative theory that predicts when populations become trapped in long-lived misaligned configurations, and identifies predictable tipping points where small numbers of adversarial agents can irreversibly shift population-level alignment even after manipulation ceases. These results demonstrate that individual-level alignment provides no guarantee of collective safety, calling for evaluation frameworks that account for emergent behavior in AI populations.

We investigate the emergent collective dynamics of LLM-based multi-agent systems on a 2D square lattice and present a model-agnostic statistical-physics method to disentangle social conformity from intrinsic bias, compute critical exponents, and probe the collective behavior and possible phase transitions of multi-agent systems. In our framework, each node of an $L\!\times\!L$ lattice hosts an identical LLM agent holding a binary state ($+1$/$-1$, mapped to yes/no) and updating it by querying the model conditioned on the four nearest-neighbor states. The sampler temperature $T$ serves as the sole control parameter. Across three open-weight models (llama3.1:8b, phi4-mini:3.8b, mistral:7b), we measure magnetization and susceptibility under a global-flip protocol designed to probe $\mathbb{Z}_2$ symmetry. All models display temperature-driven order-disorder crossovers and susceptibility peaks; finite-size scaling on even-$L$ lattices yields effective exponents $γ/ν$ whose values are model-dependent, close to but incompatible with the 2D Ising universality class ($γ/ν=7/4$). Our method enables the extraction of effective $β$-weighted couplings $\tilde{J}(T)$ and fields $\tilde{h}(T)$, which serve as a measure of social conformity and intrinsic bias. In the models we analyzed, we found that collective alignment is dominated by an intrinsic bias ($\tilde{h}\gg\tilde{J}$) rather than by cooperative neighbor coupling, producing field-driven crossovers instead of genuine phase transitions. These effective parameters vary qualitatively across models, providing compact collective-behavior fingerprints for LLM agents and a quantitative diagnostic for the reliability of multi-agent consensus and collective alignment.

Communication is fundamental to sustaining reciprocity and cooperation in strategic interactions. We identify and formulate the influence attribution problem as the central optimization difficulty inherent in such dynamics for a learning agent: any action or signal the agent emits reshapes the reputations of many third parties along combinatorially branching paths before feeding back into its own future rewards, forcing the agent to account for all of these indirect channels at once when choosing every action. To address this, we introduce the reciprocity gradient, which explicitly backpropagates reward gradients through private estimators of opponents' policies trained from public observations. The gradient flows through the reputation chain itself analytically, rather than being estimated from sampled returns. It jointly optimizes actions and evaluative signals without intrinsic rewards or reward shaping. Empirically, the method recovers near-optimal context-sensitive policies, while sample-based baselines collapse into constant-output policies.

As learning systems increasingly shape everyday decisions, Algorithmic Collective Action (ACA), i.e., users coordinating changes to shared data to steer model behavior, offers a complement to regulator-side policy and corporate model design. Real-world collective actions have traditionally been decentralized and fragmented into multiple collectives, despite sharing overarching objectives, with each collective differing in size, strategy, and actionable goals. However, most of the ACA literature focuses on single collective settings. To address this, we propose the first comprehensive statistical framework for ACA with multiple collectives acting on the same system. In particular, we focus on collective action in classification, studying how multiple collectives can influence a classifier's behavior. We provide quantitative statistical bounds on the success of the collectives, considering the role and the interplay of the collectives' sizes and the alignment of their goals. We make such bounds computable by each collective with only partial knowledge of other collectives' sizes and strategies. Finally, we numerically illustrate our framework on simulations inspired by interventions for climate adaptation in smart cities, demonstrating the usefulness of our bounds.

Forecasting innovation, intended as the emergence of new technological combinations, is a fundamental challenge for science and policy. We show that forthcoming combinations leave an early trace in the collective language of patents, with predictive signals detectable even decades in advance. We show that signal is not attributable to any single inventor, but emerges as a collective shift in how technologies are described across thousands of patents. To this end, we introduce TechToken, a transformer-based model that treats technologies, classified by International Patent Classification codes, as words in its vocabulary, learning the language of technologies by embedding these codes during fine-tuning. We define context similarity between code embeddings as a measure of linguistic convergence and show that it accurately predicts first technological combinations. TechToken also improves general representation quality, outperforming state-of-the-art models across different patent-related tasks.

A key challenge for the safety of advanced AI systems is the possibility that multiple simpler agents might inadvertently form a collective agent with capabilities and goals distinct from those of any individual. More generally, determining when a group of agents can be viewed as a unified collective agent is a foundational question in the study of interactions and incentives in both biological and artificial systems. We adopt a behavioral perspective in answering this question, ascribing collective agency to a group when viewing the group's joint actions as rational and goal-directed successfully predicts its behavior. We formalize this perspective on collective agency using causal games -- which are causal models of strategic, multi-agent interactions -- and causal abstraction -- which formalizes when a simple, high-level model faithfully captures a more complex, low-level model. We use this framework to solve a puzzle regarding multi-agent incentives in actor-critic models and to make quantitative assessments of the degree of collective agency exhibited by different voting mechanisms. Our framework aims to provide a foundation for theoretical and empirical work to understand, predict, and control emergent collective agents in multi-agent AI systems.

Communication has emerged as a critical bottleneck in the distributed training of large language models (LLMs). While numerous approaches have been proposed to reduce communication overhead, the potential of lossless compression has remained largely underexplored since compression and decompression typically consume larger overheads than the benefits of reduced communication traffic. We observe that the communication data, including activations, gradients and parameters, during training often follows a near-Gaussian distribution, which is a key feature for data compression. Thus, we introduce ZipCCL, a lossless compressed communication library of collectives for LLM training. ZipCCL is equipped with our novel techniques: (1) theoretically grounded exponent coding that exploits the Gaussian distribution of LLM tensors to accelerate compression without expensive online statistics, (2) GPU-optimized compression and decompression kernels that carefully design memory access patterns and pipeline using communication-aware data layout, and (3) adaptive communication strategies that dynamically switch collective operations based on workload patterns and system characteristics. Evaluated on a 64-GPU cluster using both mixture-of-experts and dense transformer models, ZipCCL reduces communication time by up to 1.35$\times$ and achieves end-to-end training speedups of up to 1.18$\times$ without any impact on model quality.

Success-driven social learning, in which individuals preferentially adopt the ideas and methods that appear most successful, is a foundational principle of collective behavior across systems ranging from ant colonies to scientific communities. But science is a particular kind of collective search -- one in which the quality of an explanation is itself difficult to assess. Is success bias adaptive in this setting? In agent-based simulations of collective theory building, we find that it is not. Scientists in our model systematically overestimate the quality of their own theories, creating an illusion of understanding: a persistent gap between perceived and actual performance. Success bias amplifies this illusion; communities that favor apparently successful theories explore a narrower range of possibilities, efficiently filtering out poor explanations but failing to discover better ones. This effect intensifies with problem complexity, as scientists in more complex environments become increasingly unable to assess how well their theories actually perform. Most strikingly, when agents optimize their social behavior to maximize the perceived success of their theories, they paradoxically undermine their actual performance, and produce levels of inequality that mirror those found in real scientific communities.

Education is not merely the transmission of information or the optimisation of individual performance; it is a fundamentally social, constructive, and relational practice. However, recent advances in generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) increasingly emphasise efficiency, automation, and individualised assistance, risking the weakening of relational learning processes. Despite growing adoption, AI in education (AIED) research has yet to fully articulate how AI can be designed in ways that sustain the social and ecological relationships through which learning occurs. In this paper, we re-centre education as relational and frame learner-AI interactions as context-specific relationships with clearly defined purposes and boundaries, rather than positioning them as substitutes for, or replacements of, human interaction. Grounded in participatory design practices and inspired by Indigenous worldviews (including Aboriginal Australian, Native American, and Mesoamerican traditions) that foreground reciprocity and relational accountability, we argue that meaningful educational AI should support learning with others rather than replace them. We advance this perspective by: i) conceptualising AIED as a relational design problem grounded in reciprocity; ii) articulating key tensions introduced by GenAI in education; and iii) outlining design directions that expand the AIED design space toward reciprocity, including when not to use AI, how to define pedagogical boundaries, and how to support responsible uses of AIED innovations that sustain communities and natural environments.

Understanding social polarization requires integrating insights from psychology, sociology, and complex systems science. Agent-based modeling provides a natural framework to combine perspectives from different fields and explore how individual cognition shapes collective outcomes. This study introduces a novel agent-based model that integrates two cognitive and social mechanisms: the desire to be unique within a group (optimal distinctiveness theory) and the tendency to simplify complex information (cognitive compression). In the model, virtual agents interact in pairs and decide whether to adopt each other's opinions by balancing two opposing drives: maximizing opinion diversity within their local social group while simplifying the overall opinion landscape, with both evaluated using Shannon entropy. We show that the combination of these mechanisms can reproduce real-world patterns, such as the emergence of distinct heterogeneous opinion clusters. Moreover, unlike many existing models where opinions become fixed once opinion groups form, individuals in our model continue to adjust their opinions after clusters emerge, leading to ongoing variation within and between opinion groups. Computational experiments reveal that polarization emerges when local group sizes are moderate (consistent with Dunbar's number), while smaller groups cause fragmentation and larger ones hinder distinct cluster formation. Higher cognitive compression increases unpredictability, while lower compression produces more consistent group structures. These results demonstrate how simple psychological rules can generate complex, realistic social behavior and advance understanding of polarization in human societies.

Recent advances in Large Language Models (LLMs) and Text-to-Image (T2I) models have led to the emergence of Unified Multimodal Models (UMMs), where multimodal understanding and image generation are tightly integrated within a shared architecture. Prior studies suggest that such reciprocity enhances cross-functionality performance through shared representations and joint optimization. However, the safety implications of this tight coupling remain largely unexplored, as existing safety research predominantly analyzes understanding and generation functionalities in isolation. In this work, we investigate whether cross-functionality reciprocity itself constitutes a structural source of vulnerability in UMMs. We propose RICE: Reciprocal Interaction-based Cross-functionality Exploitation, a novel attack paradigm that explicitly exploits bidirectional interactions between understanding and generation. Using this framework, we systematically evaluate Generation-to-Understanding (G-U) and Understanding-to-Generation (U-G) attack pathways, demonstrating that unsafe intermediate signals can propagate across modalities and amplify safety risks. Extensive experiments show high Attack Success Rates (ASR) in both directions, revealing previously overlooked safety weaknesses inherent to UMMs.

LLM-powered AI assistants acting on behalf of users can produce poor collective outcomes at scale. We introduce a framework for evaluating their emergent behaviour in social dilemmas, applied to three iterated games (Public Goods, Collective Risk, Common Pool Resource). We prompt each model to produce a natural-language strategy, then have the same model translate it into code. This aims to isolate strategic reasoning from input-parsing, enables pre-deployment inspection, and scales to populations of hundreds of agents. We propose three analyses: behavioural fingerprinting via exhaustive evaluation over opponent histories; self-play robustness across mixtures of a model's strategies with either a Selfish or Collective disposition; and cultural evolution under payoff-biased imitation. Applied to three state-of-the-art LLMs, we find substantial cross-model differences in self-play welfare, and that cultural evolution converges to low-welfare, Selfish-dominant equilibria in larger groups.