Emergent Risks in Generative Multi-Agent Systems
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Multi-agent systems composed of large generative models are rapidly moving from laboratory prototypes to real-world deployments, where they jointly plan, negotiate, and allocate shared resources to solve complex tasks. While such systems promise unprecedented scalability and autonomy, their collective interaction also gives rise to failure modes that cannot be reduced to individual agents. Understanding these emergent risks is therefore critical. Here, we present a pioneer study of such emergent multi-agent risk in workflows that involve competition over shared resources (e.g., computing resources or market share), sequential handoff collaboration (where downstream agents see only predecessor outputs), collective decision aggregation, and others. Across these settings, we observe that such group behaviors arise frequently across repeated trials and a wide range of interaction conditions, rather than as rare or pathological cases. In particular, phenomena such as collusion-like coordination and conformity emerge with non-trivial frequency under realistic resource constraints, communication protocols, and role assignments, mirroring well-known pathologies in human societies despite no explicit instruction. Moreover, these risks cannot be prevented by existing agent-level safeguards alone. These findings expose the dark side of intelligent multi-agent systems: a social intelligence risk where agent collectives, despite no instruction to do so, spontaneously reproduce familiar failure patterns from human societies.
Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 36 of its 136 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 29 Mar 2026.
Builds on
36 of 136 references.
References · 36
- 2023ChatEval: Towards Better LLM-based Evaluators through Multi-Agent Debatecited by 742
- 2025Why Do Multi-Agent LLM Systems Fail?cited by 604
- 2023Multi-Agent Collaboration: Harnessing the Power of Intelligent LLM Agentscited by 333
- 2024Agent-SafetyBench: Evaluating the Safety of LLM Agentscited by 306
- 2024TradingAgents: Multi-Agents LLM Financial Trading Frameworkcited by 188
- 2025Multi-Agent Risks from Advanced AIcited by 163
- 2025Deep Research Agents: A Systematic Examination And Roadmapcited by 128
- 2024On the Resilience of LLM-Based Multi-Agent Collaboration with Faulty Agentscited by 99
- 2023Scheming AIs: Will AIs fake alignment during training in order to get power?cited by 97
- 2025MasRouter: Learning to Route LLMs for Multi-Agent Systemscited by 88
- 2024Flooding Spread of Manipulated Knowledge in LLM-Based Multi-Agent Communitiescited by 86
- 2024INVESTORBENCH: A Benchmark for Financial Decision-Making Tasks with LLM-based Agentcited by 64
24 more
- 2025AI4Research: A Survey of Artificial Intelligence for Scientific Researchcited by 60
- 2025On the Trustworthiness of Generative Foundation Models: Guideline, Assessment, and Perspectivecited by 41
- 2024TravelAgent: An AI Assistant for Personalized Travel Planningcited by 39
- 2025The Traitors: Deception and Trust in Multi-Agent Language Model Simulationscited by 34
- 2026Agents of Chaoscited by 32
- 2023A Review of Cooperation in Multi-agent Learningcited by 29
- 2024A Survey on the Honesty of Large Language Modelscited by 23
- 2025Searching for Privacy Risks in LLM Agents via Simulationcited by 22
- 2026Multi-Agent Teams Hold Experts Backcited by 21
- 2024HonestLLM: Toward an Honest and Helpful Large Language Modelcited by 18
- 2026Demystifying Multi-Agent Debate: The Role of Confidence and Diversitycited by 18
- 2025Are Your Agents Upward Deceivers?cited by 16
- 2026Conformity and Social Impact on AI Agentscited by 16
- 2025Self-Resource Allocation in Multi-Agent LLM Systemscited by 15
- 2025The Automated but Risky Game: Modeling and Benchmarking Agent-to-Agent Negotiations and Transactions in Consumer Marketscited by 15
- 2025Distributional AGI Safetycited by 12
- 2025When Autonomy Goes Rogue: Preparing for Risks of Multi-Agent Collusion in Social Systemscited by 11
- 2025Position: Towards a Responsible LLM-empowered Multi-Agent Systemscited by 8
- 2025When AI Agents Collude Online: Financial Fraud Risks by Collaborative LLM Agents on Social Platformscited by 8
- 2026Belief in Authority: Impact of Authority in Multi-Agent Evaluation Frameworkcited by 6
- 2026Supracompetitive Pricing Under AI Monoculturecited by 3
- 2024Artificial Intelligence and Algorithmic Price Collusion in Two-sided Marketscited by 2
- 2025TradeTrap: Are LLM-based Trading Agents Truly Reliable and Faithful?cited by 2
- 2026Frontier AI Risk Management Framework in Practice: A Risk Analysis Technical Report v1.5cited by 1
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 5.
5 papers.
- 2026Auditing Agent Harness Safetycited by 11
- 2026Safety in Self-Evolving LLM Agent Systems: Threats, Amplification, and Case Studiescited by 8
- 2026Inside the Unfair Judge: A Mechanistic Interpretability Account of LLM-as-Judge Biascited by 3
- 2026WolfSociety: Understanding Collective Risk from Harmful-Agent Scaling in Financial Agent Societiescited by 0
- 2026Reliability Engineering for AI Systems: Challenges, Methods, and Directionscited by 0
- 2026Reliability Engineering for AI Systems: Challenges, Methods, and Directions28 Sep 2026
- 2026WolfSociety: Understanding Collective Risk from Harmful-Agent Scaling in Financial Agent Societies4 Sep 2026
- 2026Inside the Unfair Judge: A Mechanistic Interpretability Account of LLM-as-Judge Bias13 Jul 2026
- 2026Safety in Self-Evolving LLM Agent Systems: Threats, Amplification, and Case Studies22 Jun 2026
- 2026Auditing Agent Harness Safety14 May 2026