Multi-agent systems (MAS) built on Large Language Models (LLMs) are being used to approach complex problems and can surpass single model inference. However, their success hinges on navigating a fundamental cognitive tension: the need to balance broad, divergent exploration of the solution space with a principled, convergent synthesis to the optimal solution. Existing paradigms often struggle to manage this duality, leading to premature consensus, error propagation, and a critical credit assignment problem that fails to distinguish between genuine reasoning and superficially plausible arguments. To operationalize this critical synthesis phase, we introduce Conditional Listwise Policy Optimization (CLPO), a reinforcement learning objective that disentangles signals for strategic decisions and tactical rationales. By combining decision-focused policy gradients with a list-wise ranking loss over justifications, CLPO achieves clean credit assignment and stronger comparative supervision. The rise of large language models (LLMs) have enabled a new type of multi-agent system (MAS) (Park et al., 2023; Chen et al., 2023a; Zhu et al., 2025), where multiple model instances collaborate to tackle problems that exceed the capacity of any single model (Zhang et al., 2024a; Qiao et al., 2024; Han et al., 2025). By distributing roles and enabling structured interaction, MASs hold the promise of achieving robustness, creativity, and reliability that emerge from collective intelligence (Cheng et al., 2024; Pezeshkpour et al., 2024). At the heart of any effective collaborative system lies a fundamental cognitive tension. Early work in the psychology of creativity (Runco & Chand, 1995; Brophy, 2001; Zhang et al., 2020) emphasizes that intelligent problem-solving requires a dynamic balance between two seemingly contradictory modes of thought: Divergent Creativity and Convergent Critique. Guilford's theory of divergent and convergent thinking (Guilford, 1967) formalizes this duality: divergence is the generative process of exploring a wide array of alternative hypotheses, while convergence is the evaluative process of comparing, refining, and synthesizing these options.

Progress in multi-agent reinforcement learning (MARL) requires challenging benchmarks that assess the limits of current methods. However, existing benchmarks often target narrow short-horizon challenges that do not adequately stress the long-term dependencies and generalization capabilities inherent in many multi-agent systems. To address this, we first present \textit{Craftax-MA}: an extension of the popular open-ended RL environment, Craftax, that supports multiple agents and evaluates a wide range of general abilities within a single environment. Written in JAX, \textit{Craftax-MA} is exceptionally fast with a training run using 250 million environment interactions completing in under an hour. To provide a more compelling challenge for MARL, we also present \textit{Craftax-Coop}, an extension introducing heterogeneous agents, trading and more mechanics that require complex cooperation among agents for success. We provide analysis demonstrating that existing algorithms struggle with key challenges in this benchmark, including long-horizon credit assignment, exploration and cooperation, and argue for its potential to drive long-term research in MARL.

In bipartite matching problems, agents on two sides of a graph want to be paired according to their preferences. The stability of a matching depends on these preferences, which in uncertain environments also reflect agents' beliefs about the underlying state of the world. We investigate how a principal -- who observes the true state of the world -- can strategically shape these beliefs through Bayesian persuasion to induce stable matching that maximizes a desired utility. Due to the general intractability of the underlying matching optimization problem as well as the multi-receiver persuasion problem, our main considerations are two important special cases: (1) when agents can be categorized into a small number of types based on their value functions, and (2) when the number of possible world states is small. For each case, we study both public and private signaling settings. Our results draw a complete complexity landscape: we show that private persuasion remains intractable even when the number of worlds is small, while all other settings admit polynomial-time algorithms. We present efficient algorithms for each tractable case and prove NP-hardness for the intractable ones. These results illuminate the algorithmic frontier of stable matching under information design and clarify when optimal persuasion is computationally feasible.

Cooperative multi-agent planning requires agents to make joint decisions with partial information and limited communication. Coordination at the trajectory level often fails, as small deviations in timing or movement cascade into conflicts. Symbolic planning mitigates this challenge by raising the level of abstraction and providing a minimal vocabulary of actions that enable synchronization and collective progress. We present DR. WELL, a decentralized neurosymbolic framework for cooperative multi-agent planning. Cooperation unfolds through a two-phase negotiation protocol: agents first propose candidate roles with reasoning and then commit to a joint allocation under consensus and environment constraints. After commitment, each agent independently generates and executes a symbolic plan for its role without revealing detailed trajectories. Plans are grounded in execution outcomes via a shared world model that encodes the current state and is updated as agents act. By reasoning over symbolic plans rather than raw trajectories, DR. WELL avoids brittle step-level alignment and enables higher-level operations that are reusable, synchronizable, and interpretable. Experiments on cooperative block-push tasks show that agents adapt across episodes, with the dynamic world model capturing reusable patterns and improving task completion rates and efficiency. Experiments on cooperative block-push tasks show that our dynamic world model improves task completion and efficiency through negotiation and self-refinement, trading a time overhead for evolving, more efficient collaboration strategies.

Steering cooperative multi-agent reinforcement learning (MARL) towards desired outcomes is challenging, particularly when the global guidance from a human on the whole multi-agent system is impractical in a large-scale MARL. On the other hand, designing external mechanisms (e.g., intrinsic rewards and human feedback) to coordinate agents mostly relies on empirical studies, lacking a easy-to-use research tool. In this work, we employ multi-agent influence diagrams (MAIDs) as a graphical framework to address the above issues. First, we introduce the concept of MARL interaction paradigms (orthogonal to MARL learning paradigms), using MAIDs to analyze and visualize both unguided self-organization and global guidance mechanisms in MARL. Then, we design a new MARL interaction paradigm, referred to as the targeted intervention paradigm that is applied to only a single targeted agent, so the problem of global guidance can be mitigated. In implementation, we introduce a causal inference technique, referred to as Pre-Strategy Intervention (PSI), to realize the targeted intervention paradigm. Since MAIDs can be regarded as a special class of causal diagrams, a composite desired outcome that integrates the primary task goal and an additional desired outcome can be achieved by maximizing the corresponding causal effect through the PSI. Moreover, the bundled relevance graph analysis of MAIDs provides a tool to identify whether an MARL learning paradigm is workable under the design of an MARL interaction paradigm. In experiments, we demonstrate the effectiveness of our proposed targeted intervention, and verify the result of relevance graph analysis.

Automatic question generation (AQG) for mathematics education remains an elusive goal for Intelligent Tutoring Systems and educators. While pre-trained transformer-based language models have significantly advanced natural language generation, they often struggle to precisely control problem complexity and cognitive demands. In this paper, we introduce a collaborative multi-agent framework as a novel method of incorporating inference-time computation into AQG. This approach leverages multiple agents that it-eratively refine generated question-answer pairs to better balance complexity and cognitive demand. We evaluate the generated questions on five meta-evaluation criteria: relevance, importance, clarity, difficulty matching, answerability, to assess the system's ability to control the required complexity and quality of the questions. Preliminary evaluations show that this collaborative multi-agent framework elevates the quality of generated educational content by fostering a more nuanced balance between cognitive challenge and clarity. These promising outcomes suggest that integrating collaborative multi-agent workflows can yield more controlled, pedagogically valuable content that can help advance automated educational content generation and adaptive learning environments.

In multi-agent deep reinforcement learning (MADRL), agents can communicate with one another to perform a task in a coordinated manner. When multiple tasks are involved, agents can also leverage knowledge from one task to improve learning in other tasks. In this paper, we propose Multi-task Communication Skills (MCS), a MADRL with communication method that learns and performs multiple tasks simultaneously, with agents interacting through learnable communication protocols. MCS employs a Transformer encoder to encode task-specific observations into a shared message space, capturing shared communication skills among agents. To enhance coordination among agents, we introduce a prediction network that correlates messages with the actions of sender agents in each task. We adapt three multi-agent benchmark environments to multi-task settings, where the number of agents as well as the observation and action spaces vary across tasks. Experimental results demonstrate that MCS achieves better performance than multi-task MADRL baselines without communication, as well as single-task MADRL baselines with and without communication.

While the possibility of reaching human-like Artificial Intelligence (AI) remains controversial, the likelihood that the future will be characterized by a society with a growing presence of autonomous machines is high. Autonomous AI agents are already deployed and active across several industries and digital environments and alongside human-human and human-machine interactions, machine-machine interactions are poised to become increasingly prevalent. Given these developments, I argue that criminology must begin to address the implications of this transition for crime and social control. Drawing on Actor-Network Theory and Woolgar's decades-old call for a sociology of machines -- frameworks that acquire renewed relevance with the rise of generative AI agents -- I contend that criminologists should move beyond conceiving AI solely as a tool. Instead, AI agents should be recognized as entities with agency encompassing computational, social, and legal dimensions. Building on the literature on AI safety, I thus examine the risks associated with the rise of multi-agent AI systems, proposing a dual taxonomy to characterize the channels through which interactions among AI agents may generate deviant, unlawful, or criminal outcomes. I then advance and discuss four key questions that warrant theoretical and empirical attention: (1) Can we assume that machines will simply mimic humans? (2) Will crime theories developed for humans suffice to explain deviant or criminal behaviors emerging from interactions between autonomous AI agents? (3) What types of criminal behaviors will be affected first? (4) How might this unprecedented societal shift impact policing? These questions underscore the urgent need for criminologists to theoretically and empirically engage with the implications of multi-agent AI systems for the study of crime and play a more active role in debates on AI safety and governance.

Abstract-- We study the robustness of an agent decision-making model in finite-population games, with a particular focus on the Kullback-Leibler Divergence Regularized Learning (KLD-RL) model. Specifically, we examine how the model's parameters influence the impact of various sources of noise and modeling inaccuracies--factors commonly encountered in engineering applications of population games--on agents' decision-making. Our analysis provides insights into how these parameters can be effectively tuned to mitigate such effects. Theoretical results are supported by numerical examples and simulation studies that validate the analysis and illustrate practical strategies for parameter selection. The population game and evolutionary dynamics framework provides a powerful foundation for modeling and analyzing repeated strategic interactions among a population of decision-making agents [1].

Automated Program Repair (APR) has advanced rapidly with Large Language Models (LLMs), but most existing methods remain computationally expensive, and focused on a small set of languages. Ruby, despite its widespread use in web development and the persistent challenges faced by its developers, has received little attention in APR research. In this paper, we introduce RAMP, a novel lightweight framework that formulates program repair as a feedback-driven, iterative process for Ruby. RAMP employs a team of collaborative agents that generate targeted tests, reflect on errors, and refine candidate fixes until a correct solution is found. Unlike prior approaches, RAMP is designed to avoid reliance on large multilingual repair databases or costly fine-tuning, instead operating directly on Ruby through lightweight prompting and test-driven feedback. Evaluation on the XCodeEval benchmark shows that RAMP achieves a pass@1 of 67% on Ruby, outper-forming prior approaches. RAMP converges quickly within five iterations, and ablation studies confirm that test generation and self-reflection are key drivers of its performance. Further analysis shows that RAMP is particularly effective at repairing wrong answers, compilation errors, and runtime errors. Our approach provides new insights into multi-agent repair strategies, and establishes a foundation for extending LLM-based debugging tools to under-studied languages.