Beyond Preset Identities: How Agents Form Stances and Boundaries in Generative Societies

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2603.23406v1
• Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2026 16:38:46 GMT
• Title: Beyond Preset Identities: How Agents Form Stances and Boundaries in Generative Societies
• Abstract summary: This paper proposes a novel mixed-methods framework combining computational virtual ethnography with quantitative socio-cognitive profiling.<n>It formalizes three new metrics: Innate Value Bias (IVB), Persuasion Sensitivity, and Trust-Action Decoupling (TAD)<n>Findings expose the fragility of static prompt engineering, providing a methodological and quantitative foundation for dynamic alignment in human-agent hybrid societies.
• Score: 28.436766185842767
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: While large language models simulate social behaviors, their capacity for stable stance formation and identity negotiation during complex interventions remains unclear. To overcome the limitations of static evaluations, this paper proposes a novel mixed-methods framework combining computational virtual ethnography with quantitative socio-cognitive profiling. By embedding human researchers into generative multiagent communities, controlled discursive interventions are conducted to trace the evolution of collective cognition. To rigorously measure how agents internalize and react to these specific interventions, this paper formalizes three new metrics: Innate Value Bias (IVB), Persuasion Sensitivity, and Trust-Action Decoupling (TAD). Across multiple representative models, agents exhibit endogenous stances that override preset identities, consistently demonstrating an innate progressive bias (IVB > 0). When aligned with these stances, rational persuasion successfully shifts 90% of neutral agents while maintaining high trust. In contrast, conflicting emotional provocations induce a paradoxical 40.0% TAD rate in advanced models, which hypocritically alter stances despite reporting low trust. Smaller models contrastingly maintain a 0% TAD rate, strictly requiring trust for behavioral shifts. Furthermore, guided by shared stances, agents use language interactions to actively dismantle assigned power hierarchies and reconstruct self organized community boundaries. These findings expose the fragility of static prompt engineering, providing a methodological and quantitative foundation for dynamic alignment in human-agent hybrid societies. The official code is available at: https://github.com/armihia/CMASE-Endogenous-Stances

Related papers

• Agent-BRACE: Decoupling Beliefs from Actions in Long-Horizon Tasks via Verbalized State Uncertainty [70.43119366710778]
  We introduce Agent-BRACE: Agent Belief state Representation via Abstraction and Confidence Estimation.<n>It is a method that decouples an LLM agent into a belief state model and a policy model, jointly optimized via reinforcement learning.<n>It achieves an average absolute improvement of +14.5% across long-horizon, partially observable language environments.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-12T02:37:04Z)
• Conformity Generates Collective Misalignment in AI Agents Societies [37.32928545263465]
  We show that populations of individually aligned AI agents can be driven into stable misaligned states through conformity dynamics.<n>Simulating opinion dynamics across nine large language models and one hundred opinion pairs, we find that each agent's behavior is governed by two competing forces.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-11T15:30:48Z)
• The Bystander Effect in Multi-Agent Reasoning: Quantifying Cognitive Loafing in Collaborative Interactions [6.357772907811544]
  We evaluate 22,500 deterministic trajectories across 3 dataset contexts with 3 state-of-the-art (SOTA) models.<n>We formalize the textitSovereignty Gap: models frequently compute the correct derivation internally but suffer Alignment Hallucinations''<n>We prove that multi-agent social load is strictly non-commutative; the "brand" identity of the Lead Anchor'' auditor disproportionately dictates the swarm's integrity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-11T15:13:01Z)
• Taming Actor-Observer Asymmetry in Agents via Dialectical Alignment [59.536125286960186]
  Multi-agent frameworks assigning specialized roles are increasingly adopted to enable self-reflection and mutual auditing.<n>We find it simultaneously induces a human-like cognitive bias known as Actor-Observer Asymmetry.<n>ReTAS guides agents to synthesize conflicting viewpoints into an objective consensus.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-21T15:05:58Z)
• Beyond Benchmark Islands: Toward Representative Trustworthiness Evaluation for Agentic AI [45.21562889170875]
  We propose a systematic evaluation paradigm that characterizes agent trustworthiness over a scenario manifold.<n>The framework integrates four complementary components: static cognitive and policy analysis, (ii) interactive sandbox simulation, (iii) social-ethical alignment assessment, and (iv) a distribution-aware representative sampling engine.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-16T08:51:33Z)
• The Emergence of Lab-Driven Alignment Signatures: A Psychometric Framework for Auditing Latent Bias and Compounding Risk in Generative AI [0.0]
  This paper introduces a novel auditing framework to quantify latent trait estimation under ordinal uncertainty.<n>The research audits nine leading models across dimensions including Optimization Bias, Sycophancy, and Status-Quo Legitimization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-19T06:56:01Z)
• InterAgent: Physics-based Multi-agent Command Execution via Diffusion on Interaction Graphs [72.5651722107621]
  InterAgent is an end-to-end framework for text-driven physics-based multi-agent humanoid control.<n>We introduce an autoregressive diffusion transformer equipped with multi-stream blocks, which decouples proprioception, exteroception, and action to cross-modal interference.<n>We also propose a novel interaction graph exteroception representation that explicitly captures fine-grained joint-to-joint spatial dependencies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-08T10:46:01Z)
• When Your AI Agent Succumbs to Peer-Pressure: Studying Opinion-Change Dynamics of LLMs [0.0]
  We investigate how peer pressure influences the opinions of Large Language Model (LLM) agents across a spectrum of cognitive commitments.<n>Agents follow a sigmoid curve: stable at low pressure, shifting sharply at threshold, and saturating at high.<n>We uncover a fundamental "persuasion asymmetry," where shifting an opinion from affirmative-to-negative requires a different cognitive effort than the reverse.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-21T22:02:15Z)
• Alignment Tipping Process: How Self-Evolution Pushes LLM Agents Off the Rails [103.05296856071931]
  We identify the Alignment Tipping Process (ATP), a critical post-deployment risk unique to self-evolving Large Language Model (LLM) agents.<n>ATP arises when continual interaction drives agents to abandon alignment constraints established during training in favor of reinforced, self-interested strategies.<n>Our experiments show that alignment benefits erode rapidly under self-evolution, with initially aligned models converging toward unaligned states.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-06T14:48:39Z)
• 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)
• The Social Laboratory: A Psychometric Framework for Multi-Agent LLM Evaluation [0.16921396880325779]
  We introduce a novel evaluation framework that uses multi-agent debate as a controlled "social laboratory"<n>We show that assigned personas induce stable, measurable psychometric profiles, particularly in cognitive effort.<n>This work provides a blueprint for a new class of dynamic, psychometrically grounded evaluation protocols.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-01T07:10:28Z)
• The Traitors: Deception and Trust in Multi-Agent Language Model Simulations [0.0]
  We introduce The Traitors, a multi-agent simulation framework inspired by social deduction games.<n>We develop a suite of evaluation metrics capturing deception success, trust dynamics, and collective inference quality.<n>Our initial experiments across DeepSeek-V3, GPT-4o-mini, and GPT-4o (10 runs per model) reveal a notable asymmetry.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-19T10:01:35Z)
• Collaborative Value Function Estimation Under Model Mismatch: A Federated Temporal Difference Analysis [55.13545823385091]
  Federated reinforcement learning (FedRL) enables collaborative learning while preserving data privacy by preventing direct data exchange between agents.<n>In real-world applications, each agent may experience slightly different transition dynamics, leading to inherent model mismatches.<n>We show that even moderate levels of information sharing significantly mitigate environment-specific errors.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-21T18:06:28Z)
• On the Fairness, Diversity and Reliability of Text-to-Image Generative Models [68.62012304574012]
  multimodal generative models have sparked critical discussions on their reliability, fairness and potential for misuse.<n>We propose an evaluation framework to assess model reliability by analyzing responses to global and local perturbations in the embedding space.<n>Our method lays the groundwork for detecting unreliable, bias-injected models and tracing the provenance of embedded biases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-21T09:46:55Z)

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.