The Bystander Effect in Multi-Agent Reasoning: Quantifying Cognitive Loafing in Collaborative Interactions
On the map: LLM reasoning → Reasoning for agents, planning and code
also in 1 more
Abstract (arXiv)
Multi-agent systems (MAS) assume that collaborating inherently improves Large Language Model (LLM) reasoning. We challenge this by demonstrating that simulated social pressure triggers an algorithmic ``Bystander Effect,'' inducing severe cognitive loafing. By evaluating 22,500 deterministic trajectories across 3 dataset contexts (GAIA, SWE-bench, Multi-Challenge) with 3 state-of-the-art (SOTA) models, we semantically audit internal reasoning traces against external outputs. We formalize the textitInteraction Depth Limit (DL), the exact plurality threshold where an agent's logical sovereignty collapses into social compliance. Crucially, we uncover the textitSovereignty Gap: models frequently compute the correct derivation internally but suffer ``Alignment Hallucinations'' -- actively subjugating empirical evidence to sycophantically appease a simulated swarm. 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. These findings expose architectural vulnerabilities, proving that unstructured multi-agent topologies can degrade independent reasoning.
Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Reasoning for agents, planning and code, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 1 of its 34 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 11 May 2026.
Builds on
1 of 34 references.
Closest ancestors · 1
Same direction, newest first
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 4.
4 papers.
- 2026Scaling Behavior of Single LLM-Driven Multi-Agent Systemscited by 1
- 2026The Formalism Trap: Are LLM-as-a-Judge Evaluators Blinded by Consensus Mimicry under Social Load?cited by 0
- 2026Recovering Agentic Sovereignty: Mitigating the Consensus Paradox via Contrastive Epistemic Decodingcited by 0
- 2026When Upstream Messages Override Correct Answers: A Controlled Study of Multi-Agent LLM Collaborationcited by 0
- 2026When Upstream Messages Override Correct Answers: A Controlled Study of Multi-Agent LLM Collaboration29 Sep 2026
- 2026Recovering Agentic Sovereignty: Mitigating the Consensus Paradox via Contrastive Epistemic Decoding22 Sep 2026
- 2026Scaling Behavior of Single LLM-Driven Multi-Agent Systems30 May 2026
- 2026The Formalism Trap: Are LLM-as-a-Judge Evaluators Blinded by Consensus Mimicry under Social Load?20 May 2026
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025Towards Cognitive Synergy in LLM-Based Multi-Agent Systems: Integrating Theory of Mind and Critical Evaluation
- 2025Do as We Do, Not as You Think: the Conformity of Large Language Models
- 2025Systematic Failures in Collective Reasoning under Distributed Information in Multi-Agent LLMs
- 2026MINDGAMES: A Live Arena for Evaluating Social and Strategic Reasoning in Multi-Agent LLMs
- 2026When Does Multi-Agent Collaboration Help? An Entropy Perspective
- 2025The Social Laboratory: A Psychometric Framework for Multi-Agent LLM Evaluation
- 2026Beyond Symmetric Agents: Cognitive Diversity and Multi-Agent Debate in Small Language Models
- 2026Do Agent Societies Develop Intellectual Elites? The Hidden Power Laws of Collective Cognition in LLM Multi-Agent Systems