最新资讯
dev.to 我们在 DolphinBench 上测试记忆检索:纯关键词搜索暴露了自身回归 dev.to 别再把 Agent 写成 while 循环,把它建模为状态机 bloomberg.com Rightmove 与 Scout24 借 AI 产品应对低迷房市并上调展望 stackoverflow.blog 欢迎来到芯片时代:半导体制造、AI 数据中心与芯片设计的未来 www.youtube.com AI Agent 总犯同样的错:CentralAgent AI 将记忆重构为经验系统 pub.towardsai.net Netflix 科学家建议重采样 LLM 评判:5 次仅将误差棒缩小 13% pub.towardsai.net Jev 作为 LLM 前的静默层:构建提示感知的模型路由器 reddit.com OpenAI 称 Astra 仅满足 10% 安全任务标准 dev.to FreeToken:在自有 GPU 上运行前沿 MoE 模型及其内存需求 dev.to 当 AI Agent 说“完成”时,究竟完成了什么? dev.to 部署 Underdog Bark 3.0 Pro:逐字转写、自定义后端与分块设置 dev.to 为艰难对话构建 AI:五个 Agent、一条安全正则与一位盲评监督者
多元动态
登录 注册
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

原文 我的收藏

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?)

来源报道 · 1 篇 · 以下链接均前往原始媒体

← 返回精选动态 原文

更多内容