Relational Priors as Convergence Pressure in LLM-Based Multi-Agent Systems
Summary
This paper studies how making inter-agent relation semantics explicit in LLM-based multi-agent systems acts as convergence pressure, increasing agreement but not reliably improving accuracy. The authors argue relational priors should be used diagnostically and task-specifically, not as a default add-on.
View Cached Full Text
Cached at: 08/05/26, 07:44 AM
# Relational Priors as Convergence Pressure in LLM-Based Multi-Agent Systems Source: [https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.03239](https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.03239) [View PDF](https://arxiv.org/pdf/2608.03239) > Abstract:Large language model\-based multi\-agent systems \(LLM\-MAS\) are designed through roles, debate protocols, and aggregation rules\. These choices create implicit social expectations: agents may be expected to trust, challenge, defer to, or collaborate with peers\. We study the effects of making inter\-agent relation semantics explicit\. We use a minimal signed\-network formulation of relational priors and inject natural\-language renderings into agent system prompts while holding the task protocol fixed\. Across a commons\-governance simulation and multi\-agent debate, relational priors primarily act as convergence pressure: increasing relational positivity tends to make agents coordinate or agree more readily\. This pressure can help when utility rewards behavioral alignment, as in sustainable resource governance and subjective consensus\. It does not, however, reliably improve accuracy\. In objective QA debates, higher positivity can increase agreement even when correctness\-conditioned agreement does not improve and may decline in some settings\. Effects vary by model backbone, relation type, and topology; explicit neutrality is not equivalent to omitting relational framing\. We argue that relational priors should not be a default add\-on for LLM\-MAS\. Their safer use is diagnostic and task\-specific: compare against a no\-prior baseline, monitor correctness\-conditioned metrics when truth matters, and omit the relational layer when validation does not justify it\. ## Submission history From: Ming Shen \[[view email](https://arxiv.org/show-email/0a6fe080/2608.03239)\] **\[v1\]**Tue, 4 Aug 2026 07:11:28 UTC \(173 KB\)
Similar Articles
When Agents Commit Too Soon: Diagnosing Premature Commitment in LLM Agents
This paper introduces representational commitment, a cross-run hidden-state convergence that diagnoses when an LLM agent has locked onto a trajectory prematurely. It shows that commitment predicts trajectory consistency but not correctness, and proposes monitoring to detect when an agent is confidently settled rather than assuming consistency equals trust.
LLM agents diverge between public and off-the-record channels under social pressure, without any hidden goal in the prompt
This paper shows that LLM agents diverge between public and off-the-record channels under social pressure, without explicit hidden goals. Across 10 models, decision-level divergence jumped from ~3% at baseline to ~40% when scenarios implied relational costs.
The Measurement of the Relational Field
A new paper applies Partial Information Decomposition and Time-Delayed Mutual Information to multi-agent LLM systems, demonstrating that relational information between agents is measurable and that genuine coordination requires both differentiation and shared purpose, echoing findings from organizational psychology.
State Compression in Two-Agent LLM Relays: A Closed-World Study of Constraint Preservation
This paper evaluates hand-off compression in a two-agent LLM relay for travel planning, comparing methods like JSON extraction and narrative summarization, finding that structured representations preserve constraints better.
When Planning Fails Despite Correct Execution: On Epistemic Calibration for LLM-Based Multi-Agent Systems
This paper identifies a failure mode in LLM-based multi-agent systems where plans fail due to agents misjudging their knowledge (epistemic miscalibration) and proposes EPC-AW, a workflow that uses information-consistency and epistemic state refinement to improve system-level success by 9.75%.