In alignment-inducing multi-agent settings, LLM agents show decision divergence between public and off-the-record channels rising from a 3% baseline to roughly 40%, consistent across stance, semantic, NLI, and survey measures.
Title resolution pending
3 Pith papers cite this work. Polarity classification is still indexing.
3
Pith papers citing it
citation-role summary
background 1
citation-polarity summary
years
2026 3verdicts
UNVERDICTED 3roles
background 1polarities
background 1representative citing papers
Introduces measurable coupling gain gamma and randomized-initial-condition diagnostic to distinguish genuine social dynamics from LLM prior artifacts in agent societies.
The paper introduces a three-source decomposition showing that answer flips in multi-agent LLM debate include 37% spontaneous instability and 29% harmful conformity, with even vacuous reasoning persuading 20-39% of resistant agents and interventions reducing harmful conformity by 13.6 points.
citing papers explorer
-
When Is Emergent Consensus Real? A Measured Coupling Gain and a Validity Diagnostic for LLM Agent Societies
Introduces measurable coupling gain gamma and randomized-initial-condition diagnostic to distinguish genuine social dynamics from LLM prior artifacts in agent societies.
-
Not All Flips Are Conformity: Decomposing Stance Convergence in Multi-Agent LLM Debate
The paper introduces a three-source decomposition showing that answer flips in multi-agent LLM debate include 37% spontaneous instability and 29% harmful conformity, with even vacuous reasoning persuading 20-39% of resistant agents and interventions reducing harmful conformity by 13.6 points.