An official website of the United States government
Large Language Models (LLMs) have achieved remarkable success across a wide array of tasks. Due to the impressive planning and reasoning abilities of LLMs, they have been used as autonomous agents to do many tasks automatically. Recently, based on the development of using one LLM as a single planning or decision-making agent, LLM-based multi-agent systems have achieved considerable progress in complex problem-solving and world simulation. To provide the community with an overview of this dynamic field, we present this survey to offer an in-depth discussion on the essential aspects of multi-agent systems based on LLMs, as well as the challenges. Our goal is for readers to gain substantial insights on the following questions: What domains and environments do LLM-based multi-agents simulate? How are these agents profiled and how do they communicate? What mechanisms contribute to the growth of agents' capacities? For those interested in delving into this field of study, we also summarize the commonly used datasets or benchmarks for them to have convenient access. To keep researchers updated on the latest studies, we maintain an open-source GitHub repository, dedicated to outlining the research on LLM-based multi-agent systems.
more »
« less
MetaAgents: Large Language Model Based Agents for Decision-Making on Teaming
Significant advancements have occurred in the application of Large Language Models (LLMs) for social simulations. Despite this, their abilities to perform teaming in task-oriented social events are underexplored. Such capabilities are crucial if LLMs are to effectively mimic human-like social behaviors and form efficient teams to solve tasks. To bridge this gap, we introduce MetaAgents, a social simulation framework populated with LLM-based agents. MetaAgents facilitates agent engagement in conversations and a series of decision making within social contexts, serving as an appropriate platform for investigating interactions and interpersonal decision-making of agents. In particular, we construct a job fair environment as a case study to scrutinize the team assembly and skill-matching behaviors of LLM-based agents. We take advantage of both quantitative metrics evaluation and qualitative text analysis to assess their teaming abilities at the job fair. Our evaluation demonstrates that LLM-based agents perform competently in making rational decisions to develop efficient teams. However, we also identify limitations that hinder their effectiveness in more complex team assembly tasks. Our work provides valuable insights into the role and evolution of LLMs in task-oriented social simulations.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2418582
- PAR ID:
- 10597146
- Publisher / Repository:
- Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact.
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction
- Volume:
- 9
- Issue:
- 2
- ISSN:
- 2573-0142
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 1 to 27
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Silva, S; Paquete, L (Ed.)Coevolving teams of agents promises effective solutions for many coordination tasks such as search and rescue missions or deep ocean exploration. Good team performance in such domains generally relies on agents discovering complex joint policies, which is particularly difficult when the fitness functions are sparse (where many joint policies return the same or even zero fitness values). In this paper, we introduce Novelty Seeking Multiagent Evolutionary Reinforcement Learning (NS-MERL), which enables agents to more efficiently explore their joint strategy space. The key insight of NS-MERL is to promote good exploratory behaviors for individual agents using a dense, novelty-based fitness function. Though the overall team-level performance is still evaluated via a sparse fitness function, agents using NS-MERL more efficiently explore their joint action space and more readily discover good joint policies. Our results in complex coordination tasks show that teams of agents trained with NS-MERL perform significantly better than agents trained solely with task-specific fitnesses.more » « less
-
Teamwork is a set of interrelated reasoning, actions and behaviors of team members that facilitate common objectives. Teamwork theory and experiments have resulted in a set of states and processes for team effectiveness in both human-human and agent-agent teams. However, human-agent teaming is less well studied because it is so new and involves asymmetry in policy and intent not present in human teams. To optimize team performance in human-agent teaming, it is critical that agents infer human intent and adapt their polices for smooth coordination. Most literature in human-agent teaming builds agents referencing a learned human model. Though these agents are guaranteed to perform well with the learned model, they lay heavy assumptions on human policy such as optimality and consistency, which is unlikely in many real-world scenarios. In this paper, we propose a novel adaptive agent architecture in human-model-free setting on a two-player cooperative game, namely Team Space Fortress (TSF). Previous human-human team research have shown complementary policies in TSF game and diversity in human players’ skill, which encourages us to relax the assumptions on human policy. Therefore, we discard learning human models from human data, and instead use an adaptation strategy on a pre-trained library of exemplar policies composed of RL algorithms or rule-based methods with minimal assumptions of human behavior. The adaptation strategy relies on a novel similarity metric to infer human policy and then selects the most complementary policy in our library to maximize the team performance. The adaptive agent architecture can be deployed in real-time and generalize to any off-the-shelf static agents. We conducted human-agent experiments to evaluate the proposed adaptive agent framework, and demonstrated the suboptimality, diversity, and adaptability of human policies in human-agent teams.more » « less
-
As Large Language Models (LLMs) are integrated into critical real-world applications, their strategic and logical reasoning abilities are increasingly crucial. This paper evaluates LLMs' reasoning abilities in competitive environments through game-theoretic tasks, e.g., board and card games that require pure logic and strategic reasoning to compete with opponents. We first propose GTBench, a language-driven environment composing 10 widely-recognized tasks, across a comprehensive game taxonomy: complete versus incomplete information, dynamic versus static, and probabilistic versus deterministic scenarios. Then, we (1) Characterize the game-theoretic reasoning of LLMs; and (2) Perform LLM-vs.-LLM competitions as reasoning evaluation. We observe that (1) LLMs have distinct behaviors regarding various gaming scenarios; for example, LLMs fail in complete and deterministic games yet they are competitive in probabilistic gaming scenarios; (2) Most open-source LLMs, e.g., CodeLlama-34b-Instruct and Llama-2-70b-chat, are less competitive than commercial LLMs, e.g., GPT-4, in complex games, yet the recently released Llama-3-70b-Instruct makes up for this shortcoming. In addition, code-pretraining greatly benefits strategic reasoning, while advanced reasoning methods such as Chain-of-Thought (CoT) and Tree-of-Thought (ToT) do not always help. We further characterize the game-theoretic properties of LLMs, such as equilibrium and Pareto Efficiency in repeated games. Detailed error profiles are provided for a better understanding of LLMs' behavior. We hope our research provides standardized protocols and serves as a foundation to spur further explorations in the strategic reasoning of LLMs.more » « less
-
Collective, especially group-based, managerial decision making is crucial in organizations. Using an evolutionary theoretic approach to collective decision making, agent-based simulations were conducted to investigate how human collective decision making would be affected by the agents’ diversity in problem understanding and/or behavior in discussion, as well as by their social network structure. Simulation results indicated that groups with consistent problem understanding tended to produce higher utility values of ideas and displayed better decision convergence, but only if there was no group-level bias in collective problem understanding. Simulation results also indicated the importance of balance between selection-oriented (i.e., exploitative) and variation-oriented (i.e., explorative) behaviors in discussion to achieve quality final decisions. Expanding the group size and introducing nontrivial social network structure generally improved the quality of ideas at the cost of decision convergence. Simulations with different social network topologies revealed collective decision making on small-world networks with high local clustering tended to achieve highest decision quality more often than on random or scale-free networks. Implications of this evolutionary theory and simulation approach for future managerial research on collective, group, and multilevel decision making are discussed.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/10.1145/3711032
