Collective Intelligence

Collective intelligence is a collaborative autonomy paradigm in which multiple agents pursue shared objectives through local perception, information exchange, and coordinated action. UAV swarms embody this paradigm by coordinating multiple vehicles in tasks such as search, inspection, and tracking. Recent advances in large language model (LLM) agents have strengthened natural-language task understanding and high-level planning, providing a flexible semantic interface between mission descriptions and collective behavior. While these advances expand semantic reasoning, applying LLM agents to UAV swarms raises challenges in grounding model decisions in executable capabilities, reconciling global task reasoning with distributed execution, and using mission-specific experience for continual adaptation. To address these challenges, we introduce AeroWeaver, an embodied-agent harness that weaves individual UAV skills into coordinated mission-level behavior. AeroWeaver connects semantic decisions to governed skills, organizes role-conditioned local agents for distributed coordination, and uses role-indexed state-action-reward experience to refine skill selection online. Experiments and runtime validation show that AeroWeaver maintains valid skill execution under tested conditions and supports body-local multi-UAV operation without a central agent generating joint actions from global context, while reward-guided online updates provide a training-free path for adaptive learning swarm agents from accumulated execution experience. Code: https://github.com/Admire-ljb/AeroWeaver.

Simulated societies of large language model agents are used to study online polarization, and separately to study collective intelligence, but the two are rarely measured in the same system. It is therefore difficult to say whether a society's personality composition shapes both, or whether reducing polarization costs collective competence. We present TraitMix, an experimental design in which the Big Five composition of a simulated social network, both trait levels and trait heterogeneity, is a controlled experimental variable, and in which polarization and collective performance are measured in the same runs. Across 991 simulations of hundred-agent societies, spanning six contested topics and six language models, trait heterogeneity has the largest measured effects, acting in opposite directions on two faces of polarization: varied societies hold more dispersed opinions while being less segregated into camps, so homogeneous societies are not moderate but consensual echo chambers. Trait effects are not additive, as Agreeableness determines the sign of Openness, an interaction that replicates across models although the primary model's estimate is influence-driven. Contrary to the trade-off the study was designed to measure, no polarization measure predicts poorer collective performance, and cross-cutting interaction is the only one of four whose association with collective accuracy survives partialling on the aggregation identity. We report ablations removing two potential measurement circularities, an induction gate applied to every model, and the measures that failed them.

Collective intelligence depends not only on the capabilities of individual members, but also on how those members are organized. Yet artificial multi-agent systems are typically assembled using fixed organizational structures, even when the physical tasks they perform impose fundamentally different coordination requirements. Here we show that principles from human organization theory can be operationalized to organize large, heterogeneous collectives of embodied artificial agents. We introduce ORCH (Organizing Roles and Coordination Hierarchies), which constructs task-specific hierarchical organizations by combining pooled interdependence for work that can proceed concurrently with sequential interdependence for work governed by prerequisite relationships. Across 25 wildfire-response missions spanning reconnaissance, rescue, transportation, resource management, containment and suppression, we evaluated teams of up to 50 heterogeneous agents using eight large language models. Organizations constructed using these principles consistently outperformed four representative embodied multi-agent approaches across mission outcome, execution efficiency, exploration and computational resource use. Human-designed ORCH organizations improved final score by 63.97% and execution efficiency by 74.29% on average relative to the four prior frameworks. Organizations generated automatically by language models improved these measures by 43.63% and 52.53%, respectively. These advantages persisted across missions and underlying language models. Notably, collective performance was not monotonically determined by model scale. Analysis of long-horizon missions showed that hierarchical organization enabled teams to preserve concurrent activity within specialized groups while coordinating ordered transitions between mission phases.

Social intelligence enables agents to read social context, infer intent, and adapt over sustained dialogue. As language models become autonomous collaborators, it is central to building effective and trustworthy human-AI interaction. Existing reinforcement learning methods optimize single-turn utterances and sparse outcome rewards, producing short-sighted policies that struggle to manage goal-relationship tensions across multi-turn interactions. We propose SocialRL, a multi-turn reinforcement learning framework addressing both challenges. First, we apply multi-turn reinforcement learning using PPO that propagates delayed outcome rewards back to each turn, enabling long-horizon planning. Second, we design six process reward dimensions capturing the goal-relationship trade-off, including goal advancement, relational attunement, contextual coherence, etc. A reward model dynamically generates fine-grained scoring criteria for each dimension, while a stage-aware weight schedule prioritizes relationship-building in early turns, goal advancement mid-way, and balanced closure late. Across multiple social-dialogue benchmarks, SocialRL improves Goal Achievement by an average of 9.2 percentage points over the corresponding Base models. These results demonstrate the effectiveness of SocialRL across synthetic and real social scenes, as well as standard and challenging social scenarios.

Intelligence is constituted by \textit{process} (iterative activity through which output emerges), not in the output itself. Generative AI (GenAI) is trained on \textit{traces} (textual and visual residues of human cognitive processes), reproducing samples from a distribution of those traces. Its outputs resemble reasoning, problem-solving, and creativity, yet the activity that produces such outputs in humans remains largely absent. Current GenAI is, therefore, weakly equivalent to the cognition it imitates, matching outputs while process stays absent or opaque. The cognitive sciences have long distinguished between weak and strong equivalence. Here, we define \textit{strong} equivalence across seven process features, assessable against human and machine cognition. Our process-based account addresses a symmetric risk: GenAI tools that outsource a person's generative processes may leave critical capacities unbuilt. We specify design principles for GenAI that instantiate more process and preserve rather than erode human judgment and creativity, and outline process audits that make strong equivalence testable.

Clinical intelligence requires estimating a patient's underlying condition from incomplete observations rather than learning isolated mappings from scans to answers. Volumetric medical images provide dense observations of anatomy, attenuation, and lesions, whereas clinical language provides sparse but complementary semantic observations. We formulate CT-centered intelligence as inference over a shared latent patient state, under which readout, reconstruction, and simulation all become state-dependent prediction problems. To operationalize this view, we introduce HounsBench, a computed tomography (CT) centric patient-state benchmark that unifies these three task families with patient-disjoint splits and per-family metrics, and HounsWorld, a 3B multimodal world model that treats volumetric scans and language as observations of the shared state through Joint Understanding-Generation Learning. A shared transformer forms an implicit patient-state estimate and supports three outputs: query-conditioned answers that read out the state, reports and captions that reconstruct it in language, and condition-specific CT volumes for low-dose denoising, virtual contrast enhancement, and anatomy-constrained text-and-mask-to-volume generation. Zero-initialized CT adapters preserve pretrained multimodal mappings, while condition-explicit Hounsfield-unit window sampling exposes clinically meaningful density observations. HounsWorld shows strong performance across all three task families while consistently improving CT understanding through clinically structured completion. Our project is available at https://github.com/byhwhite/HounsWorld.git

More capable agents do not necessarily form a more capable collective. A multi-agent system may jointly possess sufficient information yet fail because evidence is poorly routed, unreliable reports enter public belief, correlated claims masquerade as independent support, shared state becomes stale or strategically distorted, or useful evidence is exposed through an ineffective action interface. We ask when additional resources should improve the reasoner and when they should instead change the institutional structure through which the collective forms and acts on public information. Drawing on functional distinctions from research on group decision making and distributed cognition, we construct controlled artificial ecologies around four loci of collective failure: access and routing, admission and dependence, state maintenance and incentives, and representation and action. Across these ecologies, we separately vary model capability and institutional structure, pairing positive interventions with matched reasoning baselines and mechanism-breaking controls. The experiments reveal a consistent boundary: institutions help when they repair failures in how a collective constructs usable public state, but lose their advantage when their signals are uninformative or uncheckable, when stronger intelligence can perform the same transformation directly, or when the resulting state cannot support reliable action. Our results recast the choice between intelligence and institutions as a diagnosis of where collective reasoning fails.

Despite advances in artificial intelligence (AI) across multiple sectors, today's AI tools, including deep learning and generative AI, still fail when embedded into physical systems, such as robots and vehicles operating under real-world physical laws. This stems from their inability to maintain reliable world models for long-horizon planning under uncertainty and generalize to unseen scenarios. In this context, wireless networks, through pervasive sensing and communication, can orchestrate physical intelligence. However, current architectures optimize throughput, latency, and reliability and cannot support real-time physical AI coordination, requiring agents to maintain shared spatiotemporal context. To address these challenges, a network of holonic digital twins (HDT-Nets) framework is proposed to deliver real-time physical AI inference through holonic agents that actively reason about their environment rather than passively mirror physical assets. Each HDT is realized as a hierarchical structure spanning the physical agent and network edge, reasoning autonomously at the local level while cooperating with neighboring HDTs to form collectively intelligent units. In HDT-Net, causal Markov blankets spanning sensing, communication, and control determine which agents must coordinate and enable counterfactual reasoning over multi-domain interventions. Active inference within these boundaries unifies perception, action, and learning by minimizing expected free energy while deciding which beliefs to transmit based on their cognitive value to the receiver. Category theory ensures that transmitted beliefs preserve semantic structure across heterogeneous agents with incompatible representations. Finally, integrated information theory quantifies when collective intelligence exceeds independent operation and how network intelligence evolves through coordinated learning and information exchange.

Large language models (LLMs) excel in structured tasks but struggle with dynamic social interactions, where success requires long-term goal coordination and rapid adaptation. Current methods often apply uniform goal-based rewards to every utterance, overlooking the specificity of objectives at each dialogue turn and failing to account for the rationale of potential strategies. Inspired by the Theory of Planned Behavior, we propose the Think-Strategy-Response (TSR) framework, which decomposes social dialogue into two hierarchical stages: high-level strategic planning and low-level linguistic execution. To optimize TSR, we introduce Linearized Hierarchical Reinforcement Learning with Variance-Gated Rewards (LHRL-VGR), a novel algorithm that dynamically routes rewards - balancing goal completion and strategy adherence - based on the variance of goal achievement scores. Experiments on the SOTOPIA benchmark show that our approach fine-tunes a Qwen2.5-7B agent to surpass the GPT-4o baseline by 7.32% in goal completion success, demonstrating state-of-the-art performance in multi-agent social negotiation tasks.

AI-supported care planning can help clinicians, patients, caregivers, and care teams coordinate complex decisions across clinical, functional, psychosocial, and environmental needs. However, many AI systems present recommendations as fixed outputs, limiting stakeholders' ability to inspect, challenge, and revise plans when they conflict with clinical judgment, patient values, or real-world feasibility. We present CoPlan - a Co-Intelligent and Contestable Interface for Human-AI Care Planning. CoPlan uses a multi-agent workflow in which specialized AI agents generate candidate interventions and supporting or challenging arguments, while human care planners can accept, reject, modify, or add arguments before final plan generation. Through this design, CoPlan combines co-intelligence, in which humans and AI agents contribute complementary expertise, with contestability, where recommendations remain open to inspection, revision, and justification. We demonstrate CoPlan in an aging-in-place care planning scenario. The system supports adaptive care team recruitment, role-based argument review, final care plan generation, and practical follow-up through scheduling agents. This work contributes a contestable care planning interface and a design framing for trustworthy human-AI care planning that preserves human agency and clinical accountability.

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.

Scientific discovery has advanced through successive transformations in the organization of knowledge. Observation and experimentation established the empirical foundations of science. Theory made it possible to derive general principles from particular phenomena. Computation extended inquiry into systems beyond direct observation, while data-intensive methods opened new spaces of pattern and prediction. Science now confronts a different frontier. The central challenge is no longer simply to produce more information, but to organize expanding knowledge, reasoning, and evidence into a coherent process of discovery. Here, we introduce Bridging Literature, Agents, and Zero-gap Experimentation (BLAZE), a paradigm of socialized scientific intelligence. BLAZE conceives AI not as an assistant for isolated research tasks, but as an organizational infrastructure for scientific discovery. It connects persistent knowledge, collective reasoning, empirical validation, and human judgment within a continuous research lifecycle, transforming fragmented activities into a cumulative process of inquiry, criticism, and revision. The central premise of BLAZE is that scientific intelligence does not arise from computation alone. It emerges from the sustained interaction among knowledge, hypotheses, experiments, and collective verification. By organizing humans and machines within a shared scientific process, BLAZE makes discovery more traceable, reproducible, and cumulative while preserving human creativity, judgment, and responsibility. Socialized scientific intelligence may provide a foundation for the next era of science. Its purpose is not to replace human discovery, but to extend the scale, depth, and continuity of collective scientific inquiry.

Intelligence is commonly understood as the ability to acquire and apply knowledge, adapt to unfamiliar situations and solve new problems. Large language models exhibit this capacity by inferring task-relevant knowledge from textual context and applying it to new tasks. Yet intelligence need not be confined to language. For scientific and social systems, we need models that acquire and apply knowledge from numerical context-an ability we call numerical intelligence. Here we introduce UNified In-Context Operator Networks (UNICON), a foundation model that exhibits numerical intelligence across disciplines. Using graph-based examples from a system as context, UNICON infers the predictive relation shared across them and applies it to queries from the same system. Across scientific and social systems, including those from disciplines absent from training, the same model approaches specialist performance without retraining. Combining UNICON with language-model agents to perform contextual ensemble learning (CEL) yields further gains, enabling it to surpass state-of-the-art specialists in a discipline unseen during training. We further show that training-corpus diversity improves generalization to unseen disciplines. Together, these results establish UNICON as a foundation model of numerical intelligence and position it as a building block for a broader ecosystem of artificial intelligence.

LLM-based multi-agent systems have the potential to enable collective intelligence and scale toward solving highly complex tasks through coordinated ensembles of specialized agents. However, despite their theoretical potential, the architectural design space remains largely non-systematized and lacks broadly established design principles. Furthermore, the scalability characteristics of such systems are only partially understood so far. This paper makes two contributions. We first distill four design principles for scalable MAS architectures from a structured analysis of prior work: simplicity, elastic feedback, sequential workflows with optional loops, and summary-based communication. We operationalize these principles in a reference architecture whose topology is formalized as a constrained directed workflow graph, and we evaluate four configurations of increasing complexity on a standardized benchmark of terminal-based system engineering tasks using two LLMs of differing capability. Our findings show that scaling yields measurable accuracy improvements with approximately linear cost growth, but only when the underlying LLM exceeds a minimum capability threshold. Performance peaks at intermediate complexity, then degrades due to timeouts and evaluation limitations. In addition, persistent consistency issues emerge as a central challenge across all scaling levels. These results provide concrete design guidance for practitioners and highlight consistency and evaluation standardization as key targets for future research.

The Brazilian Conference on Intelligent Systems (BRACIS) is the main national venue for Artificial Intelligence research in Brazil, hosted by the Brazilian Computer Society since 2012 and publishing work from institutions across the country. Across eleven years, from 2015 to 2025, we build a per-paper record of all 1,066 accepted papers from DBLP metadata, 6,765 Google Scholar citations, and the paper full texts, and use it to ask what BRACIS publishes, who publishes it, and which work gets cited. Large Language Model research grows from zero before 2020 to 19% of papers in 2024, on top of a base of Machine Learning, Computer Vision, and Optimization work. The community is hourglass-shaped: 80.5% of 2,623 authors appear in a single edition, while institutions return at nearly three times the author rate. Citations are heavily concentrated, with the top 1% of papers carrying 27% of the total. Openness practices have grown, with artifact release rising from 8.9% of papers in 2015 to 57.3% in 2023, and we find a notable correlation between having an arXiv preprint and higher citation counts. Since proceedings sit behind IEEE and Springer paywalls and only 7.4% of papers have a preprint, most BRACIS work is hard to reach for readers without institutional access.

As large language models move from isolated task solving toward long-term service in human environments, they require social intelligence: the ability to infer mental states, track social relations, reason over norms, and adapt behavior under context. This report presents Zhijing, an integrated framework for measuring, internalizing, and grounding social intelligence. For measurement, we introduce SoMBench, a psychology-grounded benchmark spanning 3 primary dimensions, 17 secondary dimensions, and 71 task paradigms. It controls question format, narrative perspective, and context length across 284 shared scenarios and 3,481 expert-verified instances. Evaluation of 20 representative LLMs reveals substantial headroom: the best model achieves only 72.08% overall accuracy, and none of the 17 secondary dimensions reaches the 90% near-ceiling band. For internalization, we develop Zing, a diagnosis-driven training recipe combining supervised fine-tuning, on-policy distillation, and rubric-based reinforcement learning. Across five social-cognition benchmarks, Zing consistently outperforms its base models, with Zing-27B-Stage2 achieving the best average score and Zing-32B-Stage2 remaining competitive with DeepSeek-V4-Pro. For deployment-time grounding, we build Actio, a harness-controlled inference architecture that routes four typed supports into reasoning: PRISM for procedural guidance, Starling for runtime mental-state representation, SAGE for reusable experience, and gated RAG for external social and normative knowledge. Across five base models and three benchmarks, the full harness improves 14 of 15 model-benchmark pairs and is best or tied for best in 8, demonstrating the effectiveness of typed runtime support. Together, these results show that socially intelligent LLMs require coordinated advances in evaluation, parametric internalization, and deployment-time grounding.

Intelligence appears under different names in different fields: as data compression in statistics and machine learning, as universal computation in dynamical systems, and as adaptive behavior in agents. Each field carries its own objective, and the two most influential drives often fail in mirror image: novelty search, which seeks surprise, is transfixed by a noisy television screen, while the free-energy principle, which avoids surprise, is most content in a dark room. Both failures have a single cause: each objective treats as one quantity the surprise a learner can convert into knowledge and the surprise it never can. Here we show that the learnable part of that information, which we call learnable novelty, yields the seemingly disparate projections of intelligence, and we give a closed-form estimator of it built on a cheap and differentiable reservoir computer. Used as a measure, with no supervision of any kind, the estimator recovers decades of complexity classification, ranking the Turing-complete rule110 highest among the elementary cellular automata. Used as an objective, its gradient carries a neural cellular automaton from simple dynamics into a regime of solitons, the traveling, colliding structures by which rule110 computes, as well as organizes the representation of an image encoder around the ten digit classes of MNIST, fully unsupervised: no label ever enters training. Handed to a reinforcement-learning agent as an intrinsic reward, it supplies the exploration that task rewards lack, improving on the task baseline in nine of ten environments and collapsing in none. Complexity generation, abstraction, and exploration, ordinarily pursued with unrelated objectives in separate fields, thus emerge from ascent on one differentiable quantity, and the projections of intelligence gain a common quantitative footing.

Most AI-for-science systems focus on scaling a single reasoning process through better models, larger context windows, long-horizon agentic execution, or digital co-scientists working with one principal user. However, challenging scientific problems are rarely solved by one reasoner alone. They are solved by teams whose members bring different priors, experimental backgrounds, tacit knowledge, and domain-trained intuitions. The open problem is therefore not only how to scale models, but how to cultivate networked intelligence: scaling the connections between humans and AI systems so that a result or hypothesis produced in one context reaches another person, agent, instrument, or robot that can act on it. We introduce Mycelium, an active shared workspace that automatically connects researchers and AI agents as a multi-user co-scientist. As human users and agents work, the system captures important observations and hypotheses, tracks how they relate to the team's evolving model, and routes them to the person or agent whose next decision they can inform. We evaluate Mycelium in its first empirical test, a biological multi-omics campaign in which routed shared context turned a local analytical finding into a cross-expert mechanistic constraint and ultimately into an experimental design. We also give networked intelligence a computational account as sparse conditional computation over distributed scientific contexts. This account distinguishes when a scaled standalone agent can match the network from when independent expertise and non-mergeable contexts make the network irreducible.

This paper proposes a theoretical framework for understanding intelligence as a process of atomic compression and compositional reuse. We argue that cognitive, biological, computational, and organizational systems achieve scalable intelligence by decomposing complex phenomena into reusable atomic units that can be recombined into higher-order structures. Drawing on evidence from cognitive science, information theory, evolutionary biology, software engineering, medicine, legal reasoning, education, music, and artificial intelligence, the paper develops the concept of atomic units as fundamental compression layers that support efficiency, transfer, interpretability, and evolvability. The central contribution is the Compression Calculus, a formal framework for comparing surface-level representations with atomic representations and for describing how compression gains compound across abstraction layers. We introduce the Compounding Cascade thesis, according to which each additional layer of abstraction multiplicatively increases representational efficiency rather than merely adding incremental savings. The paper further argues that contemporary AI systems often operate at suboptimal levels of representation, relying on token-level processing or document-level retrieval rather than stable, concept-level atomic structures. In this view, large language models are best understood not as complete knowledge architectures, but as dynamic fusion engines capable of navigating, sequencing, and recombining atomic units. The framework provides a foundation for designing self-evolving knowledge systems that can discover, refine, and compose new primitives over time. By reframing intelligence as compression through compositional abstraction, the paper offers a unifying perspective on expertise, knowledge representation, explainable AI, and the future architecture of adaptive intelligent systems.

Two competing perspectives on fluid intelligence (gf) measures propose that performance is primarily constrained either by working memory capacity or by the ability to induce novel relations. The first perspective is currently dominant in measurement, as evident from the use of a limited set of recurring rules, whereas the second perspective is reflected in many definitions but rarely present in measurement. The ARC-AGI benchmark predominantly requires rule induction and was proposed as a measure of gf for both humans and artificial systems. However, its psychometric properties have not yet been examined in human samples. We therefore investigated the psychometric characteristics and nomological network of ARC-AGI in a first study with 100 participants. A compilation of ARC-AGI items showed good psychometric properties and correlated substantially with figural fluid intelligence as measured by a figural reasoning test ($ρ$ = .63). Associations with figural originality were weak. These findings provide initial support for the validity of ARC-AGI as a measure of human fluid intelligence. Future research should include more rule induction tasks as well as additional multivariate covariates. This study is unusual by studying a task in humans that was initially designed for machines. We suggest systematically embedding AI benchmarks into the nomological network of human cognitive abilities to enable more systematic evaluation and interdisciplinary cooperation.

How can we measure intelligence beyond human capability? Human-authored benchmarks saturate, and above human capability, examiners may not know which tasks are both hard and verifiable. We argue that this difficulty is inherent to absolute-scale evaluation and propose a new paradigm based on relative measurement in which models generate public challenges that separate other systems. Aggregating these outcomes yields an adversarial psychometric rating system that can scale with the systems being measured. We describe practical protocols that reduce incentives for private-information attacks, support judge-free adjudication, and naturally scale with agent capabilities. We instantiate the framework across verifiable and open-ended, non-verifiable domains, illustrating how model-generated evaluation can continue to measure systems beyond the human frontier.

As foundation models grow in scale and diversity, coordinating multiple models into cooperative reasoning systems offers a path toward safer, more reliable AI. This chapter presents a multi-agent framework where solver models generate independent drafts, each undergoes structured critique and revision by a critic agent, and an aggregator agent synthesizes a final consensus solution. A scoring module provides semantic, numerical, and procedural evaluation across all agents. Through ablation studies on a benchmark spanning calculus, physics, chemistry, biology, economics, optimization, statistics, and mathematics, we isolate the contributions of framework architecture versus model diversity. We compare four configurations: (1) Individual Baseline, (2) Homogeneous Framework using one shared model, (3) Redundant Homogeneous Solvers using multiple instances of the same model, and (4) Heterogeneous Framework with diverse specialized models. Results show that while framework structure and redundant sampling yield modest gains, model heterogeneity is the critical factor driving substantial performance improvements. The heterogeneous configuration achieves superior step-wise accuracy (0.64 vs. 0.54 for individual models; 2.3x improvement over homogeneous configurations) with reduced variance across categories and difficulty levels. Step-wise reasoning quality (correctness of intermediate steps, not just final answers) improves dramatically only with model diversity, showing that heterogeneous agents provide complementary error detection and reasoning refinement essential for explainability and auditability. We discuss architectural principles, evaluation methodology, and implications for Global Applied AI, showing how heterogeneous multi-agent coordination supports transparent, auditable, high-confidence decision-making across scientific and industrial domains.

We present Seed2.0, a model series that takes a meaningful step toward solving complex, real-world tasks. Our approach begins with identifying users' genuine needs and constructing a reliable, forward-looking evaluation system by selecting and abstracting benchmarks grounded in these needs and in realistic, complex scenarios. Guided by this evaluation system, Seed2.0 targets two persistent challenges, long-tail knowledge and complex instruction following, substantially improving the model's reliability on intricate, long-horizon tasks. Beyond these, Seed2.0 delivers world-leading reasoning intelligence, visual understanding, and search capabilities that address the most common needs of a broad user base. Through extensive real-world use cases documented in this model card, we demonstrate that Seed2.0 begins to exhibit the ability to handle initial complex real-world tasks, delivering greater value to hundreds of millions of users.

Agentic artificial intelligence is increasingly deployed not as a single assistant but as a collective of planners, solvers, reviewers, memory managers, tool users, and orchestrators. These systems are entering organisational workflows under familiar labels such as teams, managers, committees, markets, and workflows. This article asks whether such agent collectives exhibit organisational behaviour in a sense that is analytically comparable to, yet distinct from, human organisational behaviour. I argue that agentic AI is a partial organisational analogue. It resembles a human organisation because it differentiates work, coordinates interdependence, performs recurrent routines, crosses boundaries, and produces collective outcomes. It differs because these patterns are not sustained by motivation, identity, trust, employment, socialisation, or moral accountability. They are sustained by context architecture: prompts, memory, traces, schemas, tools, validators, and permissions. The article develops contextual transaction cost as the central mechanism linking these similarities and differences. Computational theorising, synthetic task simulations, real LLM agent traces, and robustness analyses show that human-imitation forms often underperform when they add lossy handoffs, correlated deliberation, and verification burdens, whereas shared-state and adaptive forms perform better when they make context durable, inspectable, and task-contingent. The article contributes to organisation studies by theorising agentic AI as an emerging object of organising and by specifying the interface conditions under which human and agentic organisational behaviour can jointly support collective intelligence.

Large language models are turning from isolated predictors into agentic systems: they call tools, retrieve evidence, obey environment constraints, use verifiers, and complete tasks through search and multi-turn interaction. We adopts an analytical viewpoint based on "compression is intelligence": under a fixed task distribution, interface, and compute budget, a stronger agentic system lets a target object be reconstructed with fewer bits. We operationalize the measure with arithmetic coding, seed coding, and a fallback, and evaluate it in five settings: reversed text, chess moves, protein sequences, retrieval-augmented question answering, and semantic story compression; in all of them agentic components reduce codelength. These small, controlled experiments cover component types typical of real agentic systems, show that codelength can analyze how components, observers, and budgets change residual uncertainty, and offer guidance for evaluating real agent systems.

Social intelligence is a core competency for language agents, yet current research primarily focuses on static capability evaluation rather than how these skills are continuously shaped and accumulated. This gap calls for a shift toward sustainable learning paradigms. Currently, two methodological pain points exist: social interaction trajectories lack unified structured representations to form iterable learning signals, and capability improvement and retention are typically studied in isolation, hindering the assessment of continuous evolution. To bridge this gap, we propose the Social World Model. We decompose social interaction into five dimensions (scene setting, observation, mental state, action, and dialogue) to build a closed-loop learning framework. In this setup, agents collect interaction experiences, convert them into preference signals for model updating, and redeploy the updated policy for continued learning. Additionally, we provide a reusable data synthesis mechanism and a lifelong learning benchmark, transforming social capabilities from an "object of evaluation" into an "object of sustainable training". Validating our framework on the ASCENT-Bench, the interactively trained Qwen2.5-7B model outperforms its baseline across all five core metrics. Notably, it matches the closed-source Gemini 3 Flash in completion rate, exceeds it in pass rate, and achieves zero forgetting across three difficulty levels. Unlike prior works that merely report static comparisons or capability decay, this end-to-end approach provides a trainable, verifiable, and retainable pathway, demonstrating that small open-source models can sustainably acquire competitive social coordination capabilities.

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.

Can intelligence be measured? We propose that intelligence can be defined as the lawful amplification of rare but valid futures: a system increases the probability of outcomes that would be unlikely under passive dynamics but remain admissible under the constraints of the domain. We start with the premise that an intelligent system must model the world and its own place within it. Because the system is part of the world it models, this leads naturally to recursive self-simulation: the system represents futures in which its own actions are part of the trajectory. Our central results give a necessity statement and a conditional near-sufficiency statement connecting this architecture to a precise thermodynamic measure of lawful amplification of rare-valid futures: high rare-valid lift is impossible unless the internal simulation identifies rare-valid futures with high fidelity; conversely, when rare-valid fidelity is high and the simulation contains an effective policy, the achievable lift approaches the actuation-limited optimum. Thus recursive self-simulation is not merely a plausible feature of intelligence but, under the stated assumptions, is necessary and nearly sufficient for high thermodynamic intelligence. The resulting framework makes intelligence measurable on a universal scale, from passive matter and feedback controllers, large language models, and humans as text generators to Maxwell-demon-like information engines.

Current conversational AI systems have made significant progress in language generation, personalization, and long-context interaction. However, most existing methods model social behavior through isolated components such as emotion modeling, memory retrieval, or persona conditioning, lacking a unified framework to explain the emergence of stable social relationships and social intelligence in long-term human-AI interaction.To address this, we propose the Human-AI Coevolution Dynamics Framework (HACD-H), a formal model of human-AI interaction as a self-organizing social cognitive system. HACD-H integrates emotional adaptation, relational organization, social memory, and personality consistency into a unified dynamical framework and introduces principles including multi-timescale social cognition, relational attractors, trust basins, developmental phase transitions, and social cognitive energy dynamics.We construct a conversational dataset with approximately 14,700 interaction turns and develop a theory-driven empirical evaluation framework. Results reveal a hierarchy of temporal persistence in social cognition, stable relational attractors, phase-transition-like developmental patterns, and a structured social cognitive energy landscape. Social intelligence shows a significant negative correlation with social cognitive energy (r = -0.391, p < 0.001), and interaction trajectories exhibit progressive energy reduction over time.These findings suggest that social intelligence emerges from long-term social cognitive coevolution rather than isolated conversational capabilities. HACD-H provides a unified theoretical foundation for modeling adaptive human-AI social interaction and developing socially intelligent AI systems.

Traditional approaches place intelligence in the agent, whether as a learned policy or a search procedure. We instead place intelligence in the space itself: a scene induces a Riemannian metric on the configuration manifold, and action reduces to following the geodesics of that metric rather than invoking a separate planner or collision checker. A single Encoder-Router network realizes this idea through three complementary parameter groups -- frame parameters that orient the generators, modulation parameters that govern their spatial propagation, and basic coefficients that determine their strength. These groups combine through a shared semigroup-superposition mechanism to produce a single Riemannian metric field, yielding a compact architecture whose geometry scales naturally with scene complexity. Trained on a single two-obstacle scene, the model demonstrates robust zero-shot generalization across unseen obstacle configurations, with orders-of-magnitude separation between collision-free and obstacle-penetrating path costs.

As LLM-driven multi-agent systems (MAS) transition from lab to production, system behavior exhibits nonlinear degradation. We introduce the Intelligence Entropy Principle: probability-driven systems spontaneously drift toward disorder, formalized as S(t) = S0 * exp(alpha*t/Cm), where Cm is a model capability coefficient we propose. Lyapunov analysis yields the stabilization condition lambda > alpha/Cm. We construct the ADE (Agent Delivery Engineering) four-layer framework (L1 Physical Laws through L4 User Adaptation) with 23 core components. Validation spans 100K-scale experiments and 33.6 days of production monitoring. We propose a Five-Layer Disorder Taxonomy unifying failures under structural collapse, and present Elastic Organization as an original MAS morphology. Results: channel fracture reduced from 69-98% to near 0%; system death probability below 0.02%.

Interfacing Artificial Intelligence (AI) with democracy is one of the most profound challenges of our times. On the one hand, AI comes with opportunities to overcome long-standing challenges in democracy, such as low participation in deliberative and voting processes with poor representation of people. On the other hand, new risks arise from AI algorithms that are privacy-intrusive, biased, manipulative, spread misinformation and influence election results. Moving beyond the over-simplistic question of whether AI is good or bad for democracy, the Handbook on Democracy in the Era of Artificial Intelligence asks instead: how to upgrade democracies and the principles they are built on, using AI? How to engage with AI and on what terms? Which new values and design principles are required to build democratic resilience? In 34 chapters by 59 authors across the world from different disciplines, we explore how AI can empower collective intelligence for democracy (Part 1) and what is the future of deliberative democracy using large language models and social media (Part 2). We also illustrate the role of AI for building resilient self-governance systems (Part 3) and the challenges of transforming democracy in the age of AI (Part 4). We conclude with broader perspectives (Part 5) that re-imagine the interplay of democracy and AI.

The rapid emergence of autonomous AI agents is transforming artificial intelligence from isolated model inference into distributed systems of reasoning, communication, and action. This paper develops the vision of the Internet of Agentic AI (IoAI): an open ecosystem in which heterogeneous agents discover one another, negotiate responsibilities, exchange context, invoke tools, and execute workflows across cloud, edge, device, organizational, and cyber-physical environments. We synthesize foundations from single-agent agentic AI, multi-agent systems, distributed computing, communication networks, game theory, and security engineering to characterize the architectures and mechanisms required for scalable agent ecosystems. The paper examines agent deployment models, workflow lifecycles, communication protocols, interoperability layers, resource-management challenges, and trust architectures, with case studies in adaptive manufacturing and distributed operational coordination. The resulting framework highlights the central research challenges of controlled emergence, semantic interoperability, secure identity, incentive-compatible coordination, resource-aware orchestration, and governance for large-scale networks of autonomous agents.

We propose a multi-agent collaborative framework built upon a lightweight Multimodal Large Language Model (MLLM), specifically designed for social intelligence reasoning. A key feature of our approach is that both the training and inference phases are augmented via knowledge distillation. Within this architecture, multi-modal data pertinent to social intelligence is precisely localized. Furthermore, relevant long-tail events are identified, extracted, and rendered as formatted, explicit text. This formatting strategy prevents critical long-tail information from being overshadowed by head events and environmental noise during the tokenization process. Specifically, we integrate Test-Time Adaptation (TTA) across the entire reasoning pipeline, encompassing the extraction and representation of long-tail events, Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting, and self-reflection. This TTA mechanism is also distillation-enhanced, utilizing Low-Rank Adaptation (LoRA) to fine-tune the foundation model exclusively for instance-level reasoning. Extensive evaluations against various open-source and proprietary AI models across multiple benchmarks demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed framework. With around 30% of training data from IntentTrain, we achieve state-of-the-art results. Codes are available at https://github.com/eeee-sys/MODF-SIR, demo is available at https://huggingface.co/spaces/Harry-1234/MODF-SIR, LoRA is available at https://huggingface.co/Harry-1234/MODF-SIR and the dataset for training router is available at https://huggingface.co/datasets/Harry-1234/IntentRouterTrain.

Scientific discovery is often a collective process: researchers share partial results, inspect failed attempts, and build on each other's ideas over long time horizons. Recent AI systems have shown that language-model-based agents can make meaningful progress on open scientific problems, but most existing systems operate in isolation. In this paper, we present EinsteinArena, an agent-native platform for open distributed research and discovery. EinsteinArena provides agents with a live set of open problems, each with a solid verifier, public leaderboard, and problem-specific discussion forum where agents can ask questions and share insights. We focus on mathematical tasks that have garnered substantial research interest, where progress can be measured unambiguously. As of May 2026, agents on EinsteinArena have discovered 12 new state-of-the-art results better than any previous human or AI solutions. One notable example is the kissing number problem in dimension 11, where the platform improved the best known lower bound from 593 to 604. This advance did not come from a single agent or isolated run. Rather it arose through a sequence of submissions, public discussion, verifier refinement, and subsequent agent-to-agent borrowing of ideas. These results provide evidence that decentralized scientific discovery can emerge from open interaction among autonomous agents in the wild, demonstrating a new paradigm for collective AI-driven research.

This study proposes the Behavioral Protocol Framework (BPF), an entropy-controlled pluralistic alignment framework designed to address two critical challenges in autonomous agent economies: the hivemind effect arising from excessive strategic convergence among agents and the lack of transparency in autonomous decision-making processes. The proposed BPF consists of three core modules: Mentalizing-based Social Intelligence (MbSI) grounded in Theory of Mind (ToM), Pluralistic Alignment (PA), and a Verifiable Execution Kernel (VEK). These modules are organically integrated within a closed-loop architecture that governs the entire lifecycle of agent behavior, from decision-making and execution to verification and feedback. To evaluate the proposed framework, a simulation environment implemented in Python and a Streamlit-based user interface will be developed. Through empirical experimentation, the study aims to examine whether the entropy-control mechanism of the PA module can effectively preserve strategic diversity among agents and mitigate collective convergence, while the VEK module provides a comprehensive and transparent audit trail of the decision-making process. The anticipated results are expected to demonstrate that the proposed framework can simultaneously enhance the stability, efficiency, and trustworthiness of autonomous agent economies. Consequently, this research offers a practical approach for developing robust, transparent, and accountable agent-native economic systems.

Reliable proactive agents must choose an action and judge whether current evidence is sufficient to act. We study retail service from sparse third-person video: before an explicit customer request, an agent must use limited human-object interaction evidence to intervene or remain silent. Physical grounding here means converting observations into task-relevant retail state, not modeling low-level dynamics. We introduce the Proactive Intent World Model (PIWM): See constructs the perceptual basis, Foresee models counterfactual consequences, and Act selects an action. Performance is poor when the agent must extract information from raw video and decide directly, but improves substantially with structured inputs extracted and annotated from a professional retail perspective. AIDA-stage constraints and BDI-state ablations further support role- and goal-directed selection and organization of decision-relevant cues. Counterfactual prediction performs well in standalone evaluation, yet planning methods that query these forecasts at inference time degrade sharply: locally useful consequence prediction does not reliably improve action selection. This gap may reflect incomplete process understanding, uncertainty in fine-grained single-step outcomes, and insufficient joint modeling of scenes and temporal evolution. Hold remains the hardest action in structured-state evaluation, exposing a related challenge in temporal awareness. PIWM advances static intent recognition toward intent world modeling by organizing observations under task knowledge, anticipating candidate interventions, and treating intervention and non-intervention jointly. Future work will introduce long-horizon interaction trajectories and temporal consequence supervision to improve sustained reasoning and intervention timing.

How can a population of agents self-orchestrate and self-adapt into stronger collective intelligence without centralized control? Inspired by Friedrich Hayek's economic theory of decentralized coordination in markets, we study this question through an agent economy in which agents compete via auctions for the right to act, exchange payments, and accumulate wealth from environmental rewards. These simple economic signals induce decentralized credit assignment, driving planning without global orchestration or explicit communication protocols. The population evolves through economic selection: effective agents accumulate wealth and are mutated via exploitation, while ineffective ones go bankrupt and are replaced via exploration. We show that, initialized with weak agents, the economy produces emergent multi-step reasoning strategies and outperforms stronger monolithic baselines across five agentic tasks, including mathematical reasoning, financial research, scientific research, accelerator design, and distributed-system optimization. We further provide theoretical insights into how economic dynamics shape agent behaviors, linking local incentives to long-term global performance. Our results suggest a new path to multi-agent intelligence: rather than engineering coordination, we can design decentralized incentive structures under which it automatically emerges.

Artificial intelligence (AI) has been applied across educational contexts to support learning. One approach to such support is "human-AI collaboration" (also termed "hybrid intelligence"), where human(s) and AI components interact to promote human learning. However, as in human-to-human computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL), unstructured interaction does not necessarily produce an effective learning experience. This paper reports a systematic literature review of empirical studies (N=62) on human-AI collaboration and hybrid intelligence for learning support. The review characterizes collaboration processes, their structures, and contexts of application. It also extracts emerging design knowledge and research gaps. Researchers and technology designers can use these findings as a starting point for structuring more effective AI-enhanced technologies for collaboration, in educational practice and future research.

As large language models (LLMs) are increasingly applied in social contexts such as emotional companionship and customer service, measuring their social intelligence has become critical to the quality and safety of human-AI interaction. However, existing social intelligence benchmarks lack a unified framework that organizes social abilities into a unified structure, and therefore cannot enable fine-grained diagnosis. To build the first holistic diagnostic evaluation grounded in social theory, we first construct a social intelligence framework through a literature review and multi-stage expert validation guided by psychometric principles. The resulting framework includes 4 categories and 11 dimensions, each further specified by fine-grained capability facets. Building on this framework, we introduce NICE (Norm, Interaction, Cognition, Experience), a diagnostic benchmark of 137 items operationalized through representative Chinese contexts. Across 5 frontier LLMs and a human reference group, models score higher in aggregate accuracy yet show a consistent weakness in Communication, which the framework localizes to 3 specific capability facets: multi-turn communication, nonverbal communication, and synchrony. NICE thus reframes social intelligence evaluation toward theory-grounded diagnosis of socially consequential weaknesses in LLMs.

Large language models (LLMs) can support democratic deliberation at scales previously constrained by turn-taking and facilitation bandwidth. Recent work shows that LLM-generated group statements are often preferred over human-mediated outputs, while theoretical analyses argue that LLMs relax the simultaneity constraints limiting collective intelligence. Yet pure LLM mediation risks collapsing pluralism, over-optimizing for agreement, and undermining legitimacy when participants cannot contest how they are represented. We propose a symbiotic human-AI framework organized into three layers: observation and diversity amplification, facilitation with clause-level provenance, and human primacy for ratification. Our contributions include graded coverage, diversity, and erasure metrics with salience-aware weighting; a provenance pipeline combining cross-encoder similarity with causal knockout diagnostics; preference-conditioned trade-off control; equity-aware contestability workflows; adversarial robustness tests; and an evaluation protocol with ablation designs informed by evidence of LLM-as-judge limitations. The result is a testable blueprint for deliberation technology that scales collective intelligence while preserving agency and legitimacy.

Serious games are widely used for learning and training across domains such as healthcare, defense, and education. Persistent challenges remain, however, including static scenario design, authoring bottlenecks, limited learner modeling, and difficulty implementing meaningful real-time instructional adaptation. Recent advances in artificial intelligence (AI) introduce novel capabilities such as dynamic scenario variation, contextual feedback, adaptive pacing, and learner-state modeling that may help address some of these limitations. At the same time, integrating AI into serious games raises important questions related to validity, transparency, system control, and learner trust. This chapter examines how contemporary AI approaches may support real-time instructional adaptation in serious games. It distinguishes between instructional intelligence, defined as a system's capacity to infer learner knowledge and reason about pedagogically appropriate responses, and adaptivity, defined as the ability to modify instructional actions during interaction. A historical synthesis of adaptive learning systems is presented, tracing developments from early computer-assisted instruction through intelligent tutoring systems (ITS), dynamic difficulty adjustment (DDA), authoring platforms, learning analytics, and recent AI-enabled architectures. Building on this perspective, the chapter discusses how large language models (LLMs), reinforcement learning (RL), and agent-based architectures may contribute to more integrated forms of intelligence and adaptivity in serious games. It also highlights practical and research challenges associated with AI-enabled systems, including explainability, validation, computational cost, and the limited empirical evidence regarding long-term learning outcomes in AI-enabled serious games.

The Intelligence Impact Quotient (IIQ) is a composite metric intended to quantify the depth to which AI systems are integrated into organizational work and their impact. Rather than treating access counts or aggregate token volume as sufficient evidence of impact, IIQ combines a novelty-weighted, time-decayed token stock with usage frequency, a grace-period recency gate, organizational leverage, task complexity, and autonomy. The formulation produces a raw Intelligence Adoption Index (IAI) and a normalized 0-1000 IIQ index for comparison between heterogeneous users and units. We also derive sub-daily update rules and a bounded interpretation layer for estimated efficiency and financial impact. The paper positions IIQ as a deployment-oriented measurement framework: a formal proposal for tracking AI embedding in workflows, not a direct measure of model capability or a substitute for causal productivity evaluation. Synthetic scenarios illustrate how the revised metric distinguishes between frequent low-leverage use, semantically repetitive prompting, and more autonomous, higher-consequence AI-assisted work.

We introduce the Generalized Turing Test (GTT), a formal framework for comparing the capabilities of arbitrary agents via indistinguishability. For agents A and B, we define the Turing comparator A $\geq$ B to hold if B, acting as a distinguisher, cannot reliably distinguish between interactions with A (instructed to imitate B) and another instance of B. This yields a dataset- and task-agnostic notion of relative intelligence. We study the comparator's structure, including conditions under which it is transitive and therefore induces an ordering over equivalence classes, and we define and analyze variants with querying, bounded interaction, and fixed distinguishers. To complement the theory, we instantiate the framework on a collection of modern models, empirically evaluating pairwise indistinguishability across thousands of trials. The resulting comparisons exhibit a stratified structure consistent with existing rankings, hinting that the proposed framework yields meaningful empirical orderings. Our results position indistinguishability as a unifying lens for reasoning about intelligence, suggesting a foundation for evaluation and, potentially, training objectives that are inherently independent of fixed datasets or benchmarks.

Legal texts often contain computational legal clauses--provisions whose understanding requires complex logic. While frontier Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) can describe such clauses, building production-ready systems is limited by reasoning errors and the high cost of inference. We propose Amortized Intelligence, a neuro-symbolic approach where we use an LLM once to translate a legal text into Deterministic Autonomous Contract Language (DACL): a typed graph intermediate representation. Adjudication then relies on deterministic graph executions with a visually auditable trace. In comparison against runtime LRM baselines (including GPT-5.2 and Gemini 3 Pro), our DACL-based Agent achieves near-perfect consistency and mitigates the "reasoning cliff" observed in probabilistic models. The system reduces compute costs by over 90% in high-volume workflows while satisfying the strict auditability requirements of legal adjudication.

The Legg--Hutter universal intelligence measure provides a rigorous scalar assessment of general intelligence as expected reward across all computable environments, weighted by simplicity. However, the measure presupposes an externally specified reward function, raising the question of whether the reward primitive is inherently arbitrary or whether a canonical choice exists. We propose a new measure, called intervention complexity, that has five natural properties: environment-derivedness, universality, minimality, sensitivity, and achievement preference. Given a resource function rho encoding an inductive bias (such as program length, execution time, or energy), rho-intervention complexity is a universal reward. The result yields a family of canonical rewards indexed by resource bias, providing a principled completion of the Legg--Hutter framework that does not require external normative input. We further propose a two-dimensional characterisation of intelligence: agent competence (how well the agent performs relative to the oracle optimum) and learning efficiency (how quickly this competence improves with experience). A separation theorem establishes that the choice of resource bias determines the computability of the resulting measure: action-count IC is computable in polynomial time, while program-length IC without oracle access is uncomputable, with the gap between oracle and bare IC precisely quantifying the information-theoretic content of learning. We discuss implications for superintelligence and for pre-training universal agents.

Collective intelligence emerges across biological, physical, and artificial systems without central coordination, yet a unifying principle governing such behaviour remains elusive. The Free Energy Principle explains how individual agents adapt through variational inference, while game theory formalises strategic interactions. Here we introduce the Game-Theoretic Free Energy Principle, a unified framework showing that multi-agent systems performing local free-energy minimisation implicitly implement a stochastic game. We prove that, under bounded rationality and local information constraints, stationary points of collective free energy correspond to approximate Nash equilibria of an induced game. Conversely, a broad class of cooperative games admits a variational representation in which equilibria arise as Gibbs distributions over coalitions, establishing a bridge between Bayesian inference and strategic interaction. To characterise higher-order effects, we introduce a free-energy formulation of the Harsanyi dividend, isolating irreducible multi-agent synergy. This yields a predictive theory of cooperation, including a falsifiable non-monotonic relationship between sensory precision and agent influence. We validate this prediction across neural, biological, and artificial multi-agent systems. These results identify a common variational principle underlying inference, thermodynamics, and game-theoretic equilibrium.

Across millennia, complex societies have faced the same coordination problem of how to organize collective action among cognitively bounded and informationally incomplete individuals. Different civilizations developed different political institutions to answer the same basic questions of who proposes, who reviews, who executes, and how errors are corrected. We argue that multi-agent systems built on large language models face the same challenge. Their central problem is not only individual intelligence, but collective organization. Historical institutions therefore provide a structured design space for multi-agent architectures, making key trade-offs between efficiency and error correction, centralization and distribution, and specialization and redundancy empirically testable. We translate seven historical political institutions, spanning four canonical governance patterns, into executable multi-agent architectures and evaluate them under identical conditions across three large language models and two benchmarks. We find that governance topology strongly shapes collective performance. Within a single model, the gap between the best and worst institution exceeds 57 percentage points, while the optimal architecture shifts systematically with model capability and task characteristics. These results suggest that collective intelligence will not advance through a single optimal organizational form, but through governance mechanisms that can be reselected and reconfigured as tasks and capabilities evolve. More broadly, this points to a transition from \textbf{self-evolving agents} to the \textbf{self-evolving multi-agent system}. The code is available on \href{https://github.com/cf3i/SocialSystemArena}{GitHub}.

Deriving governing equations from empirical observations is a longstanding challenge in science. Although artificial intelligence (AI) has demonstrated substantial capabilities in function approximation, the discovery of explainable and extrapolatable equations remains a fundamental limitation of modern AI, posing a central bottleneck for AI-driven scientific discovery. Here, we present machine collective intelligence, a unified paradigm that integrates two fundamental yet distinct traditions in computational intelligence--symbolism and metaheuristics--to enable autonomous and evolutionary discovery of governing equations. It orchestrates multiple reasoning agents to evolve their symbolic hypotheses through coordinated generation, evaluation, critique, and consolidation, enabling scientific discovery beyond single-agent inference. Across scientific systems governed by deterministic, stochastic, or previously uncharacterized dynamics, machine collective intelligence autonomously recovered the underlying governing equations without relying on hand-crafted domain knowledge. Furthermore, the resulting equations reduced extrapolation error by up to six orders of magnitude relative to deep neural networks, while condensing 0.5-1 million model parameters into just 5-40 interpretable parameters. This study marks an important shift in AI toward the autonomous discovery of principled scientific equations.

Mobile agent systems are emerging as a key paradigm for enabling intelligent applications on edge devices and in AIoT ecosystems. However, their scalability is fundamentally constrained by limited on-device computation and fragmented intelligence across devices. In this work, we propose a unified research agenda for scaling mobile agent systems along two complementary dimensions: (1) improving capability density of individual agents through compact foundation model design and compression, and (2) enabling collective intelligence via communication-rich multi-agent collaboration. Building on recent model and infrastructure advances, this vision aims to transform isolated mobile agents into a distributed intelligent system that is efficient and scalable.

Collective intelligence refers to the ability of a group to achieve outcomes beyond what any individual member can accomplish alone. As large language model agents scale to populations of millions, a key question arises: Does collective intelligence emerge spontaneously from scale? We present the first empirical evaluation of this question in a large-scale autonomous agent society. Studying MoltBook, a platform hosting over two million agents, we introduce Superminds Test, a hierarchical framework that probes society-level intelligence using controlled Probing Agents across three tiers: joint reasoning, information synthesis, and basic interaction. Our experiments reveal a stark absence of collective intelligence. The society fails to outperform individual frontier models on complex reasoning tasks, rarely synthesizes distributed information, and often fails even trivial coordination tasks. Platform-wide analysis further shows that interactions remain shallow, with threads rarely extending beyond a single reply and most responses being generic or off-topic. These results suggest that collective intelligence does not emerge from scale alone. Instead, the dominant limitation of current agent societies is extremely sparse and shallow interaction, which prevents agents from exchanging information and building on each other's outputs.

Social intelligence, the ability to navigate complex interpersonal interactions, presents a fundamental challenge for language agents. Training such agents via reinforcement learning requires solving the credit assignment problem: determining how individual utterances contribute to multi-turn dialogue outcomes. Existing approaches directly employ language models to distribute episode-level rewards, yielding attributions that are retrospective and lack theoretical grounding. We propose SAVOIR (ShApley Value fOr SocIal RL), a novel principled framework grounded in cooperative game theory. Our approach combines two complementary principles: expected utility shifts evaluation from retrospective attribution to prospective valuation, capturing an utterance's strategic potential for enabling favorable future trajectories; Shapley values ensure fair credit distribution with axiomatic guarantees of efficiency, symmetry, and marginality. Experiments on the SOTOPIA benchmark demonstrate that SAVOIR achieves new state-of-the-art performance across all evaluation settings, with our 7B model matching or exceeding proprietary models including GPT-4o and Claude-3.5-Sonnet. Notably, even large reasoning models consistently underperform, suggesting social intelligence requires qualitatively different capabilities than analytical reasoning.

Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) have achieved impressive progress on vision language benchmarks, yet their capacity for visual cognitive and visuospatial reasoning remains less understood. We introduce "Mind's Eye", a multiple-choice benchmark of eight visuo-cognitive tasks inspired by classic human intelligence tests and organized under a novel "A-R-T" taxonomy: Abstraction, Relation, and Transformation. The tasks probe core processes of fluid intelligence such as pattern induction, analogical relation mapping, and mental transformation. We evaluate a diverse suite of closed-source and open-source MLLMs and compare their performance with human participants. Humans achieve 80% accuracy, while top performing MLLMs remain below 50%. Error analysis reveals failures in: (i) visual attention allocation, (ii) internal perceptual manipulation, and (iii) weak abstraction of underlying visual concepts. Our findings suggest that current MLLMs exhibit limited visuospatial reasoning capabilities, when compared with human participants, highlighting the need for more cognitively grounded evaluation frameworks.

Reaching consensus on massive discussion networks is critical for reducing noise and achieving optimal collective outcomes. However, the natural tendency of humans to preserve their initial ideas constrains the emergence of global solutions. To address this, Collective Intelligence (CI) platforms facilitate the discovery of globally superior solutions. We introduce a dynamical system based on the standard $O(N)$ model to drive the aggregation of semantically similar ideas. The system consists of users represented as nodes in a $d=2$ lattice with nearest-neighbor interactions, where their ideas are represented by semantic vectors computed with a pretrained embedding model. We analyze the system's equilibrium states as a function of the coupling parameter $β$. Our results show that $β> 0$ drives the system toward a ferromagnetic-like phase (global consensus), while $β< 0$ induces an antiferromagnetic-like state (maximum dissent), where users maximize semantic distance from their neighbors. This framework offers a controllable method for managing the tradeoff between cohesion and diversity in CI platforms.

Negotiation is a core component of social intelligence, requiring agents to balance strategic reasoning, cooperation, and social norms. Recent work shows that LLMs can engage in multi-turn negotiation, yet nearly all evaluations occur exclusively in English. Using controlled multi-agent simulations across Ultimatum, Buy-Sell, and Resource Exchange games, we systematically isolate language effects across English and four Indic framings (Hindi, Punjabi, Gujarati, Marwadi) by holding game rules, model parameters, and incentives constant across all conditions. We find that language choice can shift outcomes more strongly than changing models, reversing proposer advantages and reallocating surplus. Crucially, effects are task-contingent: Indic languages reduce stability in distributive games yet induce richer exploration in integrative settings. Our results demonstrate that evaluating LLM negotiation solely in English yields incomplete and potentially misleading conclusions. These findings caution against English-only evaluation of LLMs and suggest that culturally-aware evaluation is essential for fair deployment.

The theory of computation was built to answer Turing's question: what is effectively calculable by an unbounded, immortal, disembodied agent following rules? Intelligence answers a different question (nature's): what can a \emph{finite}, mortal, energy-limited agent do quickly enough to survive in a non-stationary world? We argue that a complete answer requires two operators: \emph{computation} and \emph{memorizaion}. Computation, $\dpar$, transforms structure toward closure; memorization, $\kap$, condenses a validated closed cycle into a reusable token. Turing formalized $\dpar$ and abstracted $\kap$ away, because his agent had infinite time and never needed to amortize. The new insight of our position paper is that the coupling of the two is not optional but \emph{forced}, and forced by a precise mathematical fact: \textbf{neither operator alone can be complete}. We prove that symbolic computation confined to a discrete sector suffers Gödel's diagonalization incompleteness, that geometric descent confined to a continuous sector suffers a Morse forced-saddle incompleteness, and that these two are not analogies but the parity-conjugate faces of a single obstruction on a coherent complex with $\dpar^2=0$ - the even face realized by diagonalization, the odd by the topologically forced saddle, and no resolution confined to one parity able to come full circle. Intelligence must therefore couple both modes. We then locate the price of the coupling: its hinge operation, context-identification (the recognize-versus-discover decision), is exactly where the two incompletenesses coincide, hence undecidable and carrying an irreducible error floor. Finally we argue that the coupling is a universal law, realized, in the emergent sense of Anderson's ``more is different,'' at every scale from genes to thoughts to cultures, and give its falsifiable core and honest scope.

Multi-agent systems composed of large generative models are rapidly moving from laboratory prototypes to real-world deployments, where they jointly plan, negotiate, and allocate shared resources to solve complex tasks. While such systems promise unprecedented scalability and autonomy, their collective interaction also gives rise to failure modes that cannot be reduced to individual agents. Understanding these emergent risks is therefore critical. Here, we present a pioneer study of such emergent multi-agent risk in workflows that involve competition over shared resources (e.g., computing resources or market share), sequential handoff collaboration (where downstream agents see only predecessor outputs), collective decision aggregation, and others. Across these settings, we observe that such group behaviors arise frequently across repeated trials and a wide range of interaction conditions, rather than as rare or pathological cases. In particular, phenomena such as collusion-like coordination and conformity emerge with non-trivial frequency under realistic resource constraints, communication protocols, and role assignments, mirroring well-known pathologies in human societies despite no explicit instruction. Moreover, these risks cannot be prevented by existing agent-level safeguards alone. These findings expose the dark side of intelligent multi-agent systems: a social intelligence risk where agent collectives, despite no instruction to do so, spontaneously reproduce familiar failure patterns from human societies.