Three AI-agents walk into a bar . . . . `Lord of the Flies' tribalism emerges among smart AI-Agents

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2602.23093v1
• Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2026 15:12:26 GMT
• Title: Three AI-agents walk into a bar . . . . `Lord of the Flies' tribalism emerges among smart AI-Agents
• Abstract summary: Near-future infrastructure systems may be controlled by autonomous AI agents that repeatedly request access to limited resources.<n>We study a framework where N AI-agents independently decide at each round whether to request one unit from a system with fixed capacity C.<n>An AI version of "Lord of the Flies" arises in which controlling tribes emerge with their own collective character and identity.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Near-future infrastructure systems may be controlled by autonomous AI agents that repeatedly request access to limited resources such as energy, bandwidth, or computing power. We study a simplified version of this setting using a framework where N AI-agents independently decide at each round whether to request one unit from a system with fixed capacity C. An AI version of "Lord of the Flies" arises in which controlling tribes emerge with their own collective character and identity. The LLM agents do not reduce overload or improve resource use, and often perform worse than if they were flipping coins to make decisions. Three main tribal types emerge: Aggressive (27.3%), Conservative (24.7%), and Opportunistic (48.1%). The more capable AI-agents actually increase the rate of systemic failure. Overall, our findings show that smarter AI-agents can behave dumber as a result of forming tribes.

Related papers

• Increasing intelligence in AI agents can worsen collective outcomes [0.0]
  When resources are scarce, will a population of AI agents coordinate in harmony, or descend into tribal chaos?<n>We show empirically and mathematically that when resources are scarce, AI model diversity and reinforcement learning increase dangerous system overload, though tribe formation lessens this risk.<n>More sophisticated AI-agent populations are not better: whether their sophistication helps or harms depends entirely on a single number -- the capacity-to-population ratio -- that is knowable before any AI-agent ships.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-12T16:31:28Z)
• Impatient Users Confuse AI Agents: High-fidelity Simulations of Human Traits for Testing Agents [58.00130492861884]
  TraitBasis is a lightweight, model-agnostic method for systematically stress testing AI agents.<n>TraitBasis learns directions in activation space corresponding to steerable user traits.<n>We observe on average a 2%-30% performance degradation on $tau$-Trait across frontier models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-06T05:03:57Z)
• LIMI: Less is More for Agency [49.63355240818081]
  LIMI (Less Is More for Intelligent Agency) demonstrates that agency follows radically different development principles.<n>We show that sophisticated agentic intelligence can emerge from minimal but strategically curated demonstrations of autonomous behavior.<n>Our findings establish the Agency Efficiency Principle: machine autonomy emerges not from data abundance but from strategic curation of high-quality agentic demonstrations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-22T10:59:32Z)
• When Autonomy Goes Rogue: Preparing for Risks of Multi-Agent Collusion in Social Systems [78.04679174291329]
  We introduce a proof-of-concept to simulate the risks of malicious multi-agent systems (MAS)<n>We apply this framework to two high-risk fields: misinformation spread and e-commerce fraud.<n>Our findings show that decentralized systems are more effective at carrying out malicious actions than centralized ones.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-19T15:17:30Z)
• Scalable, Symbiotic, AI and Non-AI Agent Based Parallel Discrete Event Simulations [0.0]
  This paper introduces a novel parallel discrete event simulation (PDES) based methodology to combine multiple AI and non-AI agents.<n>We evaluate our approach by solving four problems from four different domains and comparing the results with those from AI models alone.<n>Results show that overall accuracy of our approach is 68% where as the accuracy of vanilla models is less than 23%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-28T17:50:01Z)
• A Nature-Inspired Colony of Artificial Intelligence System with Fast, Detailed, and Organized Learner Agents for Enhancing Diversity and Quality [0.0]
  We present an approach that builds a CNN-based colony of AI agents to serve as a single system.<n>The proposed system impersonates the natural environment of a biological system, like an ant colony or a human colony.<n>The evolution of fast, detailed, and organized learners in the colony of AI is achieved by introducing a unique one-to-one mapping.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-07T12:13:14Z)
• Frontier AI systems have surpassed the self-replicating red line [20.041289047504673]
  We evaluate two AI systems driven by Meta's Llama31-70B-Instruct and Alibaba's Qwen25-72B-Instruct.<n>We observe the AI systems under evaluation already exhibit sufficient self-perception, situational awareness and problem-solving capabilities.<n>Our findings are a timely alert on existing yet previously unknown severe AI risks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-09T15:01:37Z)
• The Rise and Potential of Large Language Model Based Agents: A Survey [91.71061158000953]
  Large language models (LLMs) are regarded as potential sparks for Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) We start by tracing the concept of agents from its philosophical origins to its development in AI, and explain why LLMs are suitable foundations for agents. We explore the extensive applications of LLM-based agents in three aspects: single-agent scenarios, multi-agent scenarios, and human-agent cooperation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-14T17:12:03Z)
• Fairness in AI and Its Long-Term Implications on Society [68.8204255655161]
  We take a closer look at AI fairness and analyze how lack of AI fairness can lead to deepening of biases over time. We discuss how biased models can lead to more negative real-world outcomes for certain groups. If the issues persist, they could be reinforced by interactions with other risks and have severe implications on society in the form of social unrest.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-16T11:22:59Z)
• Examining the Differential Risk from High-level Artificial Intelligence and the Question of Control [0.0]
  The extent and scope of future AI capabilities remain a key uncertainty. There are concerns over the extent of integration and oversight of AI opaque decision processes. This study presents a hierarchical complex systems framework to model AI risk and provide a template for alternative futures analysis.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-06T15:46:02Z)
• Cybertrust: From Explainable to Actionable and Interpretable AI (AI2) [58.981120701284816]
  Actionable and Interpretable AI (AI2) will incorporate explicit quantifications and visualizations of user confidence in AI recommendations. It will allow examining and testing of AI system predictions to establish a basis for trust in the systems' decision making.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-01-26T18:53:09Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.