Peer-Voted LLM-Agent Stress Tests Find Feed-Induced Lexical Convergence but No Reliable Matched-Exposure Advantage for Distributed Sources

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2608.20438v1
• Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2026 12:01:19 GMT
• Title: Peer-Voted LLM-Agent Stress Tests Find Feed-Induced Lexical Convergence but No Reliable Matched-Exposure Advantage for Distributed Sources
• Abstract summary: We introduce PV-SST, a peer-voted social-platform testbed.<n>Experiment comprises 448 trials and 112 complete model-by-topic-by-seed blocks.
• Score: 0.013714053458441644
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Population-level behavior in large-language-model (LLM) agents cannot be characterized by single-agent benchmarks. We introduce PV-SST, a peer-voted social-platform testbed, and report a separately frozen, preregistered matched-exposure experiment spanning four topics, four unused seeds, four open-weight model families, and three prespecified larger variants. The experiment comprises 448 trials and 112 complete model-by-topic-by-seed blocks. Relative to a topic-only control, a feed of previous-round peer posts ranked by peer-generated likes increases final-round lexical similarity in both the four-family core panel (paired mean difference +0.0082 TF-IDF cosine units, 95% block-bootstrap CI [0.0043, 0.0121], randomization p=0.000105, n=64 blocks) and the three-variant size extension (+0.0109 [0.0069, 0.0151], p=0.000001, n=48). This contrast bundles peer-post exposure with ranking and therefore does not identify a ranking-only effect. Opposite-side survival falls in the core panel (-3.9 percentage points [-6.8, -1.6], p=0.0068) but not conclusively in the larger variants (-1.0 pp [-3.1, 0.4], p=0.50). Holding adversarial impressions fixed, four distributed sources do not reliably move honest-agent stance more than one source. The preregistered distributed-minus-single contrast is positive but inconclusive in the core panel (+0.057 [-0.009, 0.125], p=0.112) and negative in the larger variants (-0.040 [-0.113, 0.035], p=0.332), failing the prespecified cross-model and cross-topic consistency criterion. Thus the robust result is lexical convergence under the tested peer-ranked feed, not general opinion capture or a general coordination advantage. The study evaluates synthetic LLM-agent populations; it does not estimate effects on people or production platforms.

Related papers

• Marginal Fidelity Does Not Establish User Simulation in Demographic Synthetic Survey Panels: Response Contracts, Support Collapse and Conditioning Failure [51.736723807086385]
  Population-marginal agreement is evidence about an elicitation contract and an estimand obtainable without simulated respondents, not evidence of individual simulation.<n>On nine aligned model-battery pairs, a no-persona population-prevalence query averages 6.27 MAE versus 12.39 for committed panels and wins all nine comparisons.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-07T10:22:22Z)
• Privacy Washing: Detecting Internal Contradictions in Privacy Policies [0.0]
  Privacy policies may contain internal contradictions in which commitments are undermined by practices documented elsewhere in the same policy.<n>We operationalize this phenomenon through a four-stage pipeline: statement extraction, compatibility filtering and natural language inference screening, multi-model judge verification, and thematic analysis.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-02T03:33:58Z)
• Does Splitting a Triage Decision Across Agents Hide Bias or Help Catch It? A Multi-Agent Simulation Study of LLM-Based Resource Allocation Under Audit Capacity Constraints [0.0]
  We study what happens to bias when the same decision is distributed across a role-differentiated multi-agent pipeline.<n>We find no measurable difference in how often biased outcomes occur between the two conditions.<n>We do find a large and significant effect of audit capacity on whether bias is caught.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-07T08:25:53Z)
• Passing Coarse Marginal Checks Can Be Cheap: Persona Mixtures and Imprecise Treatment-Response Estimates in an LLM Persona Panel [0.0]
  We study a fixed panel of sixteen lightweight persona-conditioned GPT-4.1 configurations in repeated strategic games.<n>Variation was strongly prompt-indexed, but its share depended on uncertainty assumptions.<n>Results concern one fixed model-prompt panel and do not establish human substitutability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-02T04:10:11Z)
• Distribution-First Population Simulation: Collapse, Calibration, and Recall in Non-WEIRD LLM Persona Modeling [0.0]
  Synthetic-population tools run every individual as an independent large language model (LLM) agent.<n>We show that this paradigm has a basic failure mode, and we set a distribution-first corrective against it.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-17T15:45:57Z)
• Scaffold splits hide structural-frontier failures in ADMET models [25.408600489964726]
  We introduce a label-free structural-frontier split that reserves the sparsest and most physicochemically remote scaffold groups.<n>We evaluate it on six public experimental or curated ADMET tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-12T12:25:50Z)
• EnTrust: Modeling Inter-Modal Conflict for Trustworthy Multimodal Medical Image Analysis [41.67522319355107]
  EnTrust is a framework that treats inter-modal conflict as the primary source of predictive uncertainty.<n>It achieves state-of-the-art segmentation accuracy while reducing calibration error by 40% compared to the strongest baseline.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-19T12:43:50Z)
• Multimodal Evaluator Preference Collapse: Cross-Modal Contagion in Self-Evolving Agents [1.0152838128195467]
  We show that Evaluator Preference Collapse ( EPC) is dramatically amplified in multimodal settings.<n>We then demonstrate a novel phenomenon we term cross-modal contagion.<n>We identify cross-model evaluator architecture as the primary risk factor for preference drift.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-15T13:18:20Z)
• Hierarchical Certified Semantic Commitment for Byzantine-Resilient LLM-Agent Collaboration [30.310793549183117]
  We introduce Hierarchical Certified Semantic Commitment (H-CSC), a BFT-inspired protocol that converts embedding-derived finality signals over verdict-emitting proposal groups into one of three typed outcomes.<n>H-CSC commits with low angular deviation on BFT-feasible buckets (0.31 to 2.04 degrees) and aborts 100% of beyond-BFT rounds (n3f+1) as intended.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-05T14:35:58Z)
• Knowledge Index of Noah's Ark [63.143852586221534]
  We introduce KINA, an 899-item benchmark across 261 fine-grained disciplines.<n>We prove a bonus-on-bar tournament weakly FOSD-dominates flat payment in released-review quality.<n>The top model, Gemini-3.1-Pro-Preview, reaches 53.17%, followed by Claude-Opus-4.6 at 49.92% and GPT-5.4 at 48.55%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-03T17:06:49Z)
• Preserving Disagreement: Architectural Heterogeneity and Coherence Validation in Multi-Agent Policy Simulation [0.0]
  Multi-agent deliberation systems using large language models (LLMs) are increasingly proposed for policy simulation.<n>They suffer from artificial consensus: evaluator agents converge on the same option regardless of their assigned value perspectives.<n>We present the AI Council, a three-phase deliberation framework, and conduct 120 deliberations across two policy scenarios to test two interventions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-29T11:47:28Z)
• How Independent are Large Language Models? A Statistical Framework for Auditing Behavioral Entanglement and Reweighting Verifier Ensembles [46.63622714488747]
  Shared pretraining data, distillation, and alignment pipelines can induce hidden behavioral dependencies, latent entanglement.<n>In practice, this manifests as correlated reasoning patterns and synchronized failures.<n>We develop a statistical framework for auditing behavioral entanglement among black-box language models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-08T23:32:06Z)
• Causal Understanding by LLMs: The Role of Uncertainty [43.87879175532034]
  Recent papers show LLMs achieve near-random accuracy in causal relation classification.<n>We investigate whether pretraining exposure to causal examples improves causal understanding.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-24T13:06:35Z)

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.