Simulation demonstrates deliberation outcomes in contested identity debate, suggesting insights for AI systems.
This paper presents a structured multi-agent deliberation framework in which 100 large language model (LLM) agents, distributed across three frontier models (Claude Opus 4, Gemini 2.5 Pro, GPT-4o), debated whether the Jamaican musician Bob Marley should receive the Order of National Hero. Each agent was assigned a distinct professional identity, argumentation technique, and expert domain drawn from 20 stakeholder categories. Fifty agents argued for the designation; fifty argued against. The simulation ran across three deliberation rounds with structured cross-examination, sidebar caucuses, and open-floor rebuttals. Eleven of the fifty agents who began with an opposing position changed their vote during deliberation, producing a final tally of 61 to 39 in favor. The paper introduces the LLM Agent Persuasion Index (LAPI), a composite metric for benchmarking model susceptibility to adversarial persuasion in multi-agent settings, with applications to AI safety testing, red-teaming, and regulatory evaluation. Findings carry implications for computational social science, AI-assisted policy analysis, and the design of deliberative AI systems for contested public questions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Adrian Dunkley (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: