Rate-limited multi-agent teams raise three questions the emergent-communication literature has answered only empirically: what an optimal message should encode, what compression costs over a horizon, and when a learned protocol is unique enough for a teammate to read, then measure how far reinforcement learning falls short of the optimum.
Abstract
Rate-limited multi-agent teams raise three questions the emergent-communication literature has answered only empirically: what an optimal message should encode, what compression costs over a horizon, and when a learned protocol is unique enough for a teammate to read. We answer them for rate-limited Dec-POMDPs, then measure how far reinforcement learning falls short of the optimum. Our theorems fix what is achievable independently of any learner, so a gap between an engineered and a learned sender at the same bit budget is an optimization fact, not an information-theoretic one. We instantiate this on three MuJoCo arenas spanning zero, partial and rigid physical coupling, charging every condition exactly 2 bits per decision, and create the discriminating regime by closing a physical side channel within one arena, holding bodies, task and reward fixed. Communication value is governed by coupling: under rigid coupling through a shared object, no channel beats silence (+0.001 +/- 0.001, p = 0.982, n = 25), since proprioception already carries that information; without coupling, every condition solves the task; under partial coupling, the engineered 2-bit sender reaches an interquartile mean of 1.000 but the learned one reaches 0.482, indistinguishable from silence (p = 0.400, n = 25). With a shared alphabet, bandwidth cannot explain the gap. Warm-starting from an engineered receiver localizes the failure: the same channel reaches 0.857 versus 0.562 cold-started (p<0.001), so it is neither representational nor one of maintenance; reinforcement learning fails to discover the protocol. Cross-play shows learned protocols are individually meaningful but mutually unintelligible: self-play 0.980 collapses to 0.144 across seeds, and our best constructed alignment leaves at least 77% of that gap. All headline results use 25 seeds per arena and seven published baselines at matched rate.
Codebook Agent is the most accurate method on all six benchmarks the authors compare, and an MLP proxy that reads the flattened adjacency, regressed on measured utility and per-task normalized token cost, reranks the top decoded candidates in a single batched forward pass.
Mechanistic analyses show that a moderate neighborhood size enables individuals to strike an optimal balance between information sufficiency and decision-making tractability, which allows them to detect reciprocal opportunities while avoiding the deterioration of decision quality due to information overload.
Yi-Hsin Ku, Xin Ou, Ji-Qiang Zhang et al.· 0 citations
Multi-agent LLM systems can improve reasoning by pooling diverse perspectives, but their effectiveness depends on coordinating communication, particularly in hidden-profile settings where each agent holds only part of the evidence required for a correct decision. Existing protocols, including fixed schedules, round-rob...
Abhijith Babu, Ramneet Kaur, Vishal Pramanik et al.· 0 citations
A bounded agent may obtain information for a decision from its own past, from peers, or from both sources. Retaining task-relevant history can reduce later communication, while a peer message can supply what memory lacks. Under limits on both resources, how should an agent allocate its information budget? Given a fixed...
Yashar Talebirad, Eden Redman, Ali Parsaee et al.· 0 citations
Large language model agents deployed without a central controller are often assumed to require communication to coordinate their actions. We ask what remains possible without it: when independent instances of the same model cannot communicate, can they still reason about their counterparts well enough to exceed the sta...
Deborah Sinishaw, Qi-Le Zhu, Edwin Meriaux et al.· 2 citations
The collaboration tax is formulated as the team-decentralisation loss of a two-player cooperative game with private information, with two propositions characterising its sign and its equivalence to a max-superadditivity violation.
Wei-Xiang Sun, Ze-Hong Wang, Hong Huang et al.· 1 citation
Exploring how generative AI could make machine vision more accessible to businesses. The post GenEye in a Box: Making Machine Vision Something You Can Just Ask For appeared first on GPT-Lab.
MIT News · Artificial Intelligence· news.mit.eduOct 7, 2026
Students in MIT’s Concourse program delve deeply into the human condition, debate challenging questions, and learn to develop judgment about issues that can’t be quantified.
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.