智能体
arxiv.org ·
@Peter Potash
在 Wikipedia 摘要上玩 log(N)-Questions:成对前沿模型间的通信效率
论文在双 Agent 的 log(N)-Questions 游戏中评测六个前沿语言模型:提问者看到 N 段 Wikipedia 导语,须用恰好 log2 N 个是非问题找出隐藏目标;回答者只看到目标与问题,用一个词作答。两个角色由同一提供方运行,因此衡量模型在信息不对称下与自身通信的能力。实验共 408 局,文档集规模 4 至 1024 段,API 总成本 363 美元。Claude Opus 5 在 68 局中胜 28 局,明显落后于 GLM-5.3、GPT-5.6 Sol、Grok 4.6、Gemini 3.8 Flash 和 Kimi K3 的 45 至 56 局;领先五者差距很小。合并这五个模型后,胜率随集合规模下降,相关系数 r=-0.973,可用单轮可靠性参数拟合为 win=p^{log2 N},p=0.928;失败大致均分为回答错误与区分失败。
AI推荐理由 论文用 log(N)-Questions 双 Agent 博弈评测六个前沿模型,共 408 局、文档集 4 至 1024 段、API 成本 363 美元,报告 Claude Opus 5 在 68 局中仅胜 28 局,落后于 GLM-5.3、GPT-5.6 Sol、Grok 4.6、Gemini 3.8 Flash、Kimi K3 的 45 至 56 局,并给出胜率随集合规模下降的拟合形式 win=p^{log2 N}(p=0.928)。实验规模与成本披露具体,对模型自通信与信息不对称下的可靠性有参考意义;但游戏设定较窄,且模型名称与版本需以原文为准。
66
正文
Computer Science > Computation and Language
arXiv:2609.19113v1 (cs)
[Submitted on 16 Sep 2026]
Title:Playing log(N)-Questions over Wikipedia Abstracts: Communication Efficiency Between Paired Frontier Models
Authors:Peter Potash
View a PDF of the paper titled Playing log(N)-Questions over Wikipedia Abstracts: Communication Efficiency Between Paired Frontier Models, by Peter Potash
View PDF
HTML (experimental)
Abstract:We evaluate six frontier language models on the two-agent $\log(N)$-Questions game. A questioner sees $N$ Wikipedia lead paragraphs and must identify a secretly chosen target using exactly $\log_2 N$ yes/no questions. An answerer sees only the target and the question, and replies with one word. Both roles run on the same provider, so the game measures how well a model communicates with itself across an information asymmetry. We run 408 games over document sets of 4 to 1024 paragraphs at a total API cost of \$363. One model finishes well behind the others: Claude Opus 5 wins 28 of 68 games, against 45 to 56 for GLM-5.3, GPT-5.6 Sol, Grok 4.6, Gemini 3.8 Flash and Kimi K3. The leading five are only marginally separable. Pooling those five, win rate declines with set size at $r=-0.973$ and is fit by a single per-round reliability parameter. The form is $\text{win}=p^{\log_2 N}$ with $p=0.928$. Losses divide into answer errors and discrimination failures in roughly equal measure, and models almost never name a document their own evidence excludes. Every unanimous answer error from the weakest model was inspected: 32 of 34 are ``No'' answers, on properties stated in the document's first sentence, under an instruction that explicitly warns against defaulting to ``No''. Information per question, estimated from answer balance, correlates with win rate at $r=+0.88$. The only two models to extract a full bit per question are the only two that partition on document titles, a strategy absent below $N{=}32$ and used in a quarter of questions above it. Reasoning-token expenditure varies $4.5\times$ across models with little relation to success, and the trace grows as the candidate set shrinks without a matching gain in reliability.
Comments:
Subjects:
Computation and Language (cs.CL)
Cite as:
arXiv:2609.19113 [cs.CL]
(or
arXiv:2609.19113v1 [cs.CL] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.19113
Focus to learn more
arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
Submission history
From: Peter Potash [view email]
[v1]
Wed, 16 Sep 2026 17:41:12 UTC (37 KB)
Full-text links:
Access Paper:
View a PDF of the paper titled Playing log(N)-Questions over Wikipedia Abstracts: Communication Efficiency Between Paired Frontier Models, by Peter Potash
View PDF
HTML (experimental)
TeX Source
view license
Current browse context:
cs.CL
new
|
recent
| 2026-09
Change to browse by:
cs
References & Citations
NASA ADS
Google Scholar
Semantic Scholar
export BibTeX citation
Loading...
BibTeX formatted citation
×
loading...
Data provided by:
Bookmark
Bibliographic Tools
Bibliographic and Citation Tools
Bibliographic Explorer Toggle
Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)
Connected Papers Toggle
Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)
Litmaps Toggle
Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)
scite.ai Toggle
scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)
Code, Data, Media
Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article
alphaXiv Toggle
alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?)
Links to Code Toggle
CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)
DagsHub Toggle
DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)
GotitPub Toggle
Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)
Huggingface Toggle
Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?)
ScienceCast Toggle
ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)
Demos
Demos
Replicate Toggle
Replicate (What is Replicate?)
Spaces Toggle
Hugging Face Spaces (What is Spaces?)
Spaces Toggle
TXYZ.AI (What is TXYZ.AI?)
Related Papers
Recommenders and Search Tools
Link to Influence Flower
Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)
Core recommender toggle
CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)
Author
Venue
Institution
Topic
About arXivLabs
arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Which authors of this paper are endorsers? |
Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)