Beneficial societal outcomes cannot be guaranteed by aligning individual AI systems with the intentions of their operators or users. Even an AI system that is perfectly aligned to the intentions of its operating organization can lead to bad outcomes if the goals of that organization are misaligned with those of other institutions and individuals. For this reason, we need full-stack alignment, the concurrent alignment of AI systems and the institutions that shape them with what people value. This can be done without imposing a particular vision of individual or collective flourishing. We argue that current approaches for representing values, such as utility functions, preference orderings, or unstructured text, struggle to address these and other issues effectively. They struggle to distinguish values from other signals, to support principled normative reasoning, and to model collective goods. We propose thick models of value will be needed. These structure the way values and norms are represented, enabling systems to distinguish enduring values from fleeting preferences, to model the social embedding of individual choices, and to reason normatively, applying values in new domains. We demonstrate this approach in five areas: AI value stewardship, normatively competent agents, win-win negotiation systems, meaning-preserving economic mechanisms, and democratic regulatory institutions.

Large Language Model (LLM) agents have demonstrated impressive capabilities for social interaction and are increasingly being deployed in situations where they might engage with both human and artificial agents. These interactions represent a critical frontier for LLM-based agents, yet existing evaluation methods fail to measure how well these capabilities generalize to novel social situations. In this paper, we introduce a method for evaluating the ability of LLM-based agents to cooperate in zero-shot, mixed-motive environments using Concordia, a natural language multi-agent simulation environment. Our method measures general cooperative intelligence by testing an agent's ability to identify and exploit opportunities for mutual gain across diverse partners and contexts. We present empirical results from the NeurIPS 2024 Concordia Contest, where agents were evaluated on their ability to achieve mutual gains across a suite of diverse scenarios ranging from negotiation to collective action problems. Our findings reveal significant gaps between current agent capabilities and the robust generalization required for reliable cooperation, particularly in scenarios demanding persuasion and norm enforcement.

As agentic platforms scale, agents are moving beyond fixed roles and predefined toolchains, creating an urgent need for flexible and decentralized coordination. Current structured communication protocols such as direct agent-to-agent messaging or MCP-style tool calls offer reliability, but they struggle to support the emergent and swarm-like intelligence required in large adaptive systems. Distributed agents must learn continuously, share context fluidly, and coordinate without depending solely on central planners. This paper revisits gossip protocols as a complementary substrate for agentic communication. Gossip mechanisms, long valued in distributed systems for their decentralized and fault-tolerant properties, provide scalable and adaptive diffusion of knowledge and fill gaps that structured protocols alone cannot efficiently address. However, gossip also introduces challenges, including semantic relevance, temporal staleness, and limited guarantees on action consistency in rapidly changing environments. We examine how gossip can support context-rich state propagation, resilient coordination under uncertainty, and emergent global awareness. We also outline open problems around semantic filtering, trust, and knowledge decay. Rather than proposing a complete framework, this paper presents a research agenda for integrating gossip into multi-agent communication stacks and argues that gossip is essential for future agentic ecosystems that must remain robust, adaptive, and self-organizing as their scale and autonomy increase.

Vibe coding is a new programming paradigm in which human engineers instruct large language model (LLM) agents to complete complex coding tasks with little supervision. Although it is increasingly adopted, are vibe coding outputs really safe to deploy in production? To answer this question, we propose SU S VI B E S, a benchmark consisting of 200 feature-request software engineering tasks from real-world open-source projects, which, when given to human programmers, led to vulnerable implementations. We evaluate multiple widely used coding agents with frontier models on this benchmark. Disturbingly, all agents perform poorly in terms of software security. Although 61% of the solutions from SWE-Agent with Claude 4 Sonnet are functionally correct, only 10.5% are secure. Further experiments demonstrate that preliminary security strategies, such as augmenting the feature request with vulnerability hints, cannot mitigate these security issues. Our findings raise serious concerns about the widespread adoption of vibe-coding, particularly in security-sensitive applications.

Recent advances in AI call for a paradigm shift from bit-centric communication to goal- and semantics-oriented architectures, paving the way for AI-native 6G networks. In this context, we address a key open challenge: enabling heterogeneous AI agents to exchange compressed latent-space representations while mitigating semantic noise and preserving task-relevant meaning. We cast this challenge as learning both the communication topology and the alignment maps that govern information exchange among agents, yielding a learned network sheaf equipped with orthogonal maps. This learning process is further supported by a semantic denoising end compression module that constructs a shared global semantic space and derives sparse, structured representations of each agent's latent space. This corresponds to a nonconvex dictionary learning problem solved iteratively with closed-form updates. Experiments with mutiple AI agents pre-trained on real image data show that the semantic denoising and compression facilitates AI agents alignment and the extraction of semantic clusters, while preserving high accuracy in downstream task. The resulting communication network provides new insights about semantic heterogeneity across agents, highlighting the interpretability of our methodology.

Network routing is a distributed decision problem which naturally admits numerical performance measures, such as the average time for a packet to travel from source to destination. OLPOMDP, a policy-gradient reinforcement learning algorithm, was successfully applied to simulated network routing under a number of network models. Multiple distributed agents (routers) learned co-operative behavior without explicit inter-agent communication, and they avoided behavior which was individually desirable, but detrimental to the group's overall performance. Furthermore, shaping the reward signal by explicitly penalizing certain patterns of sub-optimal behavior was found to dramatically improve the convergence rate.

Large robot fleets are now common in warehouses and other logistics settings, where small control gains translate into large operational impacts. In this article, we address task scheduling for lifelong Multi-Agent Pickup-and-Delivery (MAPD) and propose a hybrid method that couples learning-based global guidance with lightweight optimization. A graph neural network policy trained via reinforcement learning outputs a desired distribution of free agents over an aggregated warehouse graph. This signal is converted into region-to-region rebalancing through a minimum-cost flow, and finalized by small, local assignment problems, preserving accuracy while keeping per-step latency within a 1 s compute budget. On congested warehouse benchmarks from the League of Robot Runners (LRR) with up to 500 agents, our approach improves throughput by up to 10% over the 2024 winning scheduler while maintaining real-time execution. The results indicate that coupling graph-structured learned guidance with tractable solvers reduces congestion and yields a practical, scalable blueprint for high-throughput scheduling in large fleets.

The rapid deployment of large language model (LLM)-based agents introduces a new class of risks, driven by their capacity for autonomous planning, multi-step tool integration, and emergent interactions. It raises some risk factors for existing governance approaches as they remain fragmented: Existing frameworks are either static taxonomies driven; however, they lack an integrated end-to-end pipeline from risk identification to operational assurance, especially for an agentic platform. We propose AGENTSAFE, a practical governance framework for LLM-based agentic systems. The framework operationalises the AI Risk Repository into design, runtime, and audit controls, offering a governance framework for risk identification and assurance. The proposed framework, AGENTSAFE, profiles agentic loops (plan -> act -> observe -> reflect) and toolchains, and maps risks onto structured taxonomies extended with agent-specific vulnerabilities. It introduces safeguards that constrain risky behaviours, escalates high-impact actions to human oversight, and evaluates systems through pre-deployment scenario banks spanning security, privacy, fairness, and systemic safety. During deployment, AGENTSAFE ensures continuous governance through semantic telemetry, dynamic authorization, anomaly detection, and interruptibility mechanisms. Provenance and accountability are reinforced through cryptographic tracing and organizational controls, enabling measurable, auditable assurance across the lifecycle of agentic AI systems. The key contributions of this paper are: (1) a unified governance framework that translates risk taxonomies into actionable design, runtime, and audit controls; (2) an Agent Safety Evaluation methodology that provides measurable pre-deployment assurance; and (3) a set of runtime governance and accountability mechanisms that institutionalise trust in agentic AI ecosystems.

The deployment of multi-agent systems in dynamic, adversarial environments like robotic soccer necessitates real-time decision-making, sophisticated cooperation, and scalable algorithms to avoid the curse of dimensionality. While Reinforcement Learning (RL) offers a promising framework, existing methods often struggle with the multi-granularity of tasks (long-term strategy vs. instant actions) and the complexity of large-scale agent interactions. This paper presents a unified Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning (MARL) framework that addresses these challenges. First, we establish a baseline using Proximal Policy Optimization (PPO) within a client-server architecture for real-time action scheduling, with PPO demonstrating superior performance (4.32 avg. goals, 82.9% ball control). Second, we introduce a Hierarchical RL (HRL) structure based on the options framework to decompose the problem into a high-level trajectory planning layer (modeled as a Semi-Markov Decision Process) and a low-level action execution layer, improving global strategy (avg. goals increased to 5.26). Finally, to ensure scalability, we integrate mean-field theory into the HRL framework, simplifying many-agent interactions into a single agent vs. the population average. Our mean-field actor-critic method achieves a significant performance boost (5.93 avg. goals, 89.1% ball control, 92.3% passing accuracy) and enhanced training stability. Extensive simulations of 4v4 matches in the Webots environment validate our approach, demonstrating its potential for robust, scalable, and cooperative behavior in complex multi-agent domains.

Abstract--The integration of large language models (LLMs) into healthcare IoT systems promises faster decisions and improved medical support. LLMs are also deployed as multi-agent teams to assist AI doctors by debating, voting, or advising on decisions. However, when multiple assistant agents interact, coordinated adversaries can collude to create false consensus, pushing an AI doctor toward harmful prescriptions. We develop an experimental framework with scripted and unscripted doctor agents, adversarial assistants, and a verifier agent that checks decisions against clinical guidelines. Using 50 representative clinical questions, we find that collusion drives the Attack Success Rate (ASR) and Harmful Recommendation Rates (HRR) up to 100% in unprotected systems. This work provides the first systematic evidence of collusion risk in AI healthcare and demonstrates a practical, lightweight defence that ensures guideline fidelity. Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly integrated into healthcare IoT systems, supporting tasks such as remote patient monitoring, diagnosis, and treatment recommendations. In this setting, ensuring the security and trustworthiness of AI decisions is critical, since medical errors caused by unsafe recommendations can severely harm patients [1]. However, AI doctors and LLM-based clinical decision agents face multiple vulnerabilities.