When Does Personality Composition Matter for Multi-Agent LLM Teams?
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2606.27443v1
- Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2026 18:13:33 GMT
- Title: When Does Personality Composition Matter for Multi-Agent LLM Teams?
- Abstract summary: We investigate whether personality composition matters for multi-agent team performance.<n>We find that personality effects depend critically on task structure.<n>We discuss implications for multi-agent system design.
- Score: 11.599619860803472
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
- Abstract: Personality prompting shapes how large language models communicate, yet whether these behavioral shifts affect objective task outcomes remains under-explored. Prior work shows that agents prompted with low agreeableness produce adversarial language, while those prompted with high agreeableness become cooperative, but the relationship between communication style and task performance has not been systematically examined across multiple domains. In this work, we investigate whether personality composition matters for multi-agent team performance by manipulating personality traits across frontier LLMs on three task domains: structured coding, open-ended research collaboration, and competitive bargaining. We find that personality effects depend critically on task structure. In coding tasks, low agreeableness leads to large communication shifts that have little effect on milestone completion. In open-ended collaboration and bargaining, the same manipulation substantially degrades performance. We discuss implications for multi-agent system design and the limits of personality manipulation.
Related papers
- CollabSim: A CSCW-Grounded Methodology for Investigating Collaborative Competence of LLM Agents through Controlled Multi-Agent Experiments [32.043112677406064]
CollabSim is a simulation framework that combines a theory-grounded definition of collaborative capabilities, controlled manipulation of interaction conditions, and action-level probing of agents' internal states.<n> Experiments show that CollabSim can capture condition effects, separate model performance patterns, and reveal task-dependent effects of agent design.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-06-04T17:06:22Z) - MT-PingEval: Evaluating Multi-Turn Collaboration with Private Information Games [70.37904949359938]
We evaluate language models in multi-turn interactions using a suite of collaborative games that require effective communication about private information.<n>We find that language models are unable to use interactive collaboration to improve over the non-interactive baseline scenario.<n>We analyze the linguistic features of these dialogues, assessing the roles of sycophancy, information density, and discourse coherence.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-02-27T17:13:20Z) - Cross-Task Experiential Learning on LLM-based Multi-Agent Collaboration [63.90193684394165]
We introduce multi-agent cross-task experiential learning (MAEL), a novel framework that endows LLM-driven agents with explicit cross-task learning and experience accumulation.<n>During the experiential learning phase, we quantify the quality for each step in the task-solving workflow and store the resulting rewards.<n>During inference, agents retrieve high-reward, task-relevant experiences as few-shot examples to enhance the effectiveness of each reasoning step.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-05-29T07:24:37Z) - Identifying Cooperative Personalities in Multi-agent Contexts through Personality Steering with Representation Engineering [0.0]
Large Language Models (LLMs) gain autonomous capabilities, their coordination in multi-agent settings becomes increasingly important.<n>Inspired by Axelrod's Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma (IPD) tournaments, we explore how personality traits influence LLM cooperation.<n>Using representation engineering, we steer Big Five traits (e.g., Agreeableness, Conscientiousness) in LLMs and analyze their impact on IPD decision-making.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-03-17T01:21:54Z) - The Power of Personality: A Human Simulation Perspective to Investigate Large Language Model Agents [33.84280027120088]
This paper systematically investigates large language models (LLMs) intelligence through the lens of human simulation''<n>By assigning Big Five personality traits to LLM agents and evaluating their performance in single- and multi-agent settings, we reveal that specific traits significantly influence reasoning accuracy (closed tasks) and creative output (open tasks)<n> Furthermore, multi-agent systems exhibit collective intelligence distinct from individual capabilities, driven by distinguishing combinations of personalities.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-02-28T09:01:39Z) - When Disagreements Elicit Robustness: Investigating Self-Repair Capabilities under LLM Multi-Agent Disagreements [56.29265568399648]
We argue that disagreements prevent premature consensus and expand the explored solution space.<n>Disagreements on task-critical steps can derail collaboration depending on the topology of solution paths.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-02-21T02:24:43Z) - Mutual Theory of Mind in Human-AI Collaboration: An Empirical Study with LLM-driven AI Agents in a Real-time Shared Workspace Task [56.92961847155029]
Theory of Mind (ToM) significantly impacts human collaboration and communication as a crucial capability to understand others.
Mutual Theory of Mind (MToM) arises when AI agents with ToM capability collaborate with humans.
We find that the agent's ToM capability does not significantly impact team performance but enhances human understanding of the agent.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-09-13T13:19:48Z) - LLM Agents in Interaction: Measuring Personality Consistency and
Linguistic Alignment in Interacting Populations of Large Language Models [4.706971067968811]
We create a two-group population of large language models (LLMs) agents using a simple variability-inducing sampling algorithm.
We administer personality tests and submit the agents to a collaborative writing task, finding that different profiles exhibit different degrees of personality consistency and linguistic alignment to their conversational partners.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-02-05T11:05:20Z) - Cooperation, Competition, and Maliciousness: LLM-Stakeholders Interactive Negotiation [52.930183136111864]
We propose using scorable negotiation to evaluate Large Language Models (LLMs)
To reach an agreement, agents must have strong arithmetic, inference, exploration, and planning capabilities.
We provide procedures to create new games and increase games' difficulty to have an evolving benchmark.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-09-29T13:33:06Z) - Unleashing the Emergent Cognitive Synergy in Large Language Models: A Task-Solving Agent through Multi-Persona Self-Collaboration [116.09561564489799]
Solo Performance Prompting transforms a single LLM into a cognitive synergist by engaging in multi-turn self-collaboration with multiple personas.
A cognitive synergist is an intelligent agent that collaboratively combines multiple minds' strengths and knowledge to enhance problem-solving in complex tasks.
Our in-depth analysis shows that assigning multiple fine-grained personas in LLMs improves problem-solving abilities compared to using a single or fixed number of personas.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-07-11T14:45:19Z) - Building Cooperative Embodied Agents Modularly with Large Language
Models [104.57849816689559]
We address challenging multi-agent cooperation problems with decentralized control, raw sensory observations, costly communication, and multi-objective tasks instantiated in various embodied environments.
We harness the commonsense knowledge, reasoning ability, language comprehension, and text generation prowess of LLMs and seamlessly incorporate them into a cognitive-inspired modular framework.
Our experiments on C-WAH and TDW-MAT demonstrate that CoELA driven by GPT-4 can surpass strong planning-based methods and exhibit emergent effective communication.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-07-05T17:59:27Z)
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.