Search arXiv⌕ Search

arXiv · 2609.35835

Amadeus: When Models of People Meet

Abstract

With the constant advancements in AI, one possibility is to model agents after humans and, in turn, use these agents to carry out synthetic interactions. Such models could be used to predict interactions between their real counterparts, or potentially interactions at larger scales. In this paper, we test a more controlled version of this question through chess. We use 8 elite chess players, seal their direct pairwise games, learn each player independently using different methods, and then compose the resulting models on the withheld dyads. To evaluate the generated interactions, we use two measurements: opening-family total variation distance and win-draw-loss (WDL) total variation distance. M1 primarily improves WDL fidelity while producing smaller opening-family improvements, whereas M2 produces much larger opening-family improvements while having little effect on WDL-TV. For opening-family behaviour under M2, the correct assignment of the eight learned player identities also gives the closest match among all $8! = 40{,}320$ possible assignments. These results show that at least some properties of previously unseen interactions can be recovered from independently learned individuals. The partial recovery observed here may reflect limitations of the current individual modelling methods rather than a fundamental limit on compositional interaction recovery. An additional post-hoc method that combines the two mechanisms improves both measurements, suggesting that recovery across these behavioural properties is not necessarily mutually exclusive.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Karl Hanna. 2026-10-01. Amadeus: When Models of People Meet. https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.35835

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

The Alignment Flywheel: A Governance-Centric Hybrid MAS for Architecture-Agnostic Safety

Multi-agent systems provide mature abstractions for role decomposition, coordination, and normative governance, but increasingly capable learned components make post-deployment safety harder to inspect, audit, and update. When safety behavior is absorbed into a decision component, narrow failures may require retraining or rollback of the full component. This instantiates our vision of the Alignment Flywheel as a governance-centric hybrid MAS architecture that decouples decision generation from safety governance. We denote the agent or policy that generates candidate trajectories as the Proposer; it passes its output to a governed Safety Oracle stack, which returns safety scores, prediction uncertainty, audit coverage uncertainty, and evidence hooks through a stable interface. An Enforcement layer applies explicit risk policy at runtime. Around this loop, a governance MAS performs monitoring, red-teaming, verification, triage, refinement, and versioned release management. The central engineering principle is patch locality: many newly observed safety failures can be mitigated through small governance batches for the Oracle stack and its audit state rather than by retraining or retracting the Proposer. The architecture is implementation-agnostic with respect to both Proposer and Oracle. It defines the roles, artifacts, protocols, and release semantics needed for runtime gating, audit intake, signed updates, staged rollout, and rollback. We demonstrate executability in two scenarios: a learned spatial Oracle patched through regression-checked governance updates, and a clinical GenAI proxy setting illustrating structured norms, escalation, and audit coverage. Our implementation code and documentation are available open source at https://github.com/decide-ugent/Alignment-Flywheel.

cs.MA↗

High Volatility and Action Bias Distinguish LLMs from Humans in Group Coordination

Humans exhibit remarkable abilities to coordinate in groups. As large language models (LLMs) become more capable, it remains an open question whether they can demonstrate comparable adaptive coordination and whether they use the same strategies as humans. To better understand this, we compare LLM and human performance on a common-interest game with imperfect monitoring: Group Binary Search. In this $n$-player game, participants need to coordinate their actions to achieve a common objective. Players independently submit numerical values in an effort to collectively sum to a randomly assigned target number. Without direct communication, they rely on group feedback to iteratively adjust their submissions until they reach the target number. Our findings show that, unlike humans who adapt and stabilize their behavior over time, LLMs often fail to improve across games and exhibit excessive switching, which impairs group convergence. Moreover, richer feedback (e.g., numerical error magnitude) benefits humans substantially but has small effects on LLMs. Finally, we show that GRPO can be effective in reducing the excessive switching. Taken together, by grounding the analysis in human baselines and mechanism-level metrics, including reactivity scaling, switching dynamics, and learning across games, we point to differences in human and LLM groups and provide a behaviorally grounded diagnostic for closing the coordination gap.

cs.MA↗

Decentralized Multi-Agent Systems with Shared Context

Multi-agent systems (MAS) can scale large language model agents on long-horizon tasks by running them in parallel, yet existing designs waste much of this parallelism in bubbles: agent time spent waiting on others or redoing a peer's work. These bubbles stem from how agents communicate. Independent agents share nothing and rediscover what their peers have already found; peer-communicating agents wait at synchronous rounds; and under centralized orchestration, the main agent blocks on its sub-agents while progress is relayed. We propose Decentralized Language Models (DeLM), a MAS framework on top of existing agent harnesses that squeezes out these bubbles by replacing the main agent with a shared context and a task queue. Agents asynchronously claim tasks, publish findings as soon as they are available, and build on or correct one another's progress, with every peer's status visible to all. On long-horizon tasks from Terminal-Bench 4.0 and DeepSWE v1.1, and on SWE-bench Verified, DeLM is both more accurate and faster than Codex, Claude Code, their native subagents, and AOrchestra in every setting, improving accuracy by up to 17.5 points over the strongest baseline and running up to 2.49x faster than the harness it builds on. On ProgramBench, where agents rebuild programs from scratch, DeLM makes faster progress than Claude Code and finishes a 120-minute budget up to 19.9 points higher in test pass rate. The code is available on our project website at https://yuzhenmao.github.io/DeLM/.

cs.MA↗