mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Small-world Networks of Agents Brainstorm AI Risks to Support Ideation

arXiv 2609.24859 ↗First posted 21 Sep 2026cs.HC cs.AIcited by 0

On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Social simulation and multi-agent debate

Abstract (arXiv)

The ideation phase of participatory AI risk assessment often starts with a blank slate or a limited list of predefined risks, making it difficult to surface indirect or systemic harms. To address this limitation, we propose a three-stage ideation support tool. The tool complements participatory AI, rather than replacing it, and helps focus later engagement with affected communities. First, it dynamically discovers stakeholders depending on the given AI use and recursively expanding outward, allowing overlooked or indirect stakeholders to emerge. Second, it simulates these stakeholders with LLMs, connecting them into a network of a given topology, and having them ideate about risks. Third, it prioritizes risks using network centrality measures. In an initial evaluation, we found that betweenness centrality run through agents connected in a small-world network works best as it elevates risks raised by stakeholders who bridge disconnected groups, surfacing novel, systemic harms that traditional methods often miss. On an AI chatbot companion use case, this approach increased the novelty of the identified risks by approximately 1.1 points over single LLM brainstorming, and by 0.5 points over agentic LLM brainstorming, measured on a normalized five-point Likert scale, without reducing the plausibility or severity of the identified risks. To test whether our framework helps a human-led ideation session using the Futures Wheel approach, we divided 11 teams of non-western young chatbot users into two types: control (team) and treatment (team) in a participatory AI risk assessment. The control teams started from a list of risks generated by the 45 AI practitioners in the initial evaluation; the treatment teams started from a list generated by our framework. The treatment teams identified more risks overall, and more systemic, human-computer interaction, and environmental risks.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Social simulation and multi-agent debate, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 18 of its 58 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 21 Sep 2026.

Builds on

18 of 58 references.

Closest ancestors · 1

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2023Generative Agents: Interactive Simulacra of Human Behavior7 Apr

Other references · 17

  1. 2023Bias Runs Deep: Implicit Reasoning Biases in Persona-Assigned LLMscited by 191
  2. 2023MART: Improving LLM Safety with Multi-round Automatic Red-Teamingcited by 161
  3. 2022Power to the People? Opportunities and Challenges for Participatory AIcited by 137
  4. 2023The Participatory Turn in AI Design: Theoretical Foundations and the Current State of Practicecited by 86
  5. 2024The Effects of Generative AI on Design Fixation and Divergent Thinkingcited by 37
  6. 2023CreativeConnect: Supporting Reference Recombination for Graphic Design Ideation with Generative AIcited by 34
  7. 2024Farsight: Fostering Responsible AI Awareness During AI Application Prototypingcited by 28
  8. 2023AHA!: Facilitating AI Impact Assessment by Generating Examples of Harmscited by 26
  9. 2021Algorithmic Auditing and Social Justice: Lessons from the History of Audit Studiescited by 22
  10. 2024How AI Ideas Affect the Creativity, Diversity, and Evolution of Human Ideas: Evidence From a Large, Dynamic Experimentcited by 22
  11. 2024Plurals: A System for Guiding LLMs Via Simulated Social Ensemblescited by 17
  12. 2025AIdeation: Designing a Human-AI Collaborative Ideation System for Concept Designerscited by 14
5 more
  1. 2024AI-generated faces influence gender stereotypes and racial homogenizationcited by 13
  2. 2025WeAudit: Scaffolding User Auditors and AI Practitioners in Auditing Generative AIcited by 13
  3. 2024ExploreGen: Large Language Models for Envisioning the Uses and Risks of AI Technologiescited by 12
  4. 2024A Taxonomy of Systemic Risks from General-Purpose AIcited by 12
  5. 2026When and How AI Should Assist Brainstorming for AI Impact Assessmentcited by 1

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025Secondary Stakeholders in AI: Fighting for, Brokering, and Navigating Agency
  2. 2026Questionnaire Responses Do not Capture the Safety of AI Agents
  3. 2026Understanding Cognition-Induced Risks in Agentic AI Systems
  4. 2026When Agents Talk: Discourse, Manipulation, and Risk in an Agentic Social Network
  5. 2026Emergent Strategic Reasoning Risks in AI: A Taxonomy-Driven Evaluation Framework
  6. 2025Risk Analysis Techniques for Governed LLM-based Multi-Agent Systems
  7. 2026"Humans welcome to observe": A First Look at the Agent Social Network Moltbook
  8. 2025MAEBE: Multi-Agent Emergent Behavior Framework