发表机构
Princeton University; New York University（普林斯顿大学; 纽约大学）
机构由 AI 辅助整理，请以论文原文为准。AI 中文总结
本研究通过黑手党游戏实验表明，通信能提升LLM社会识别隐藏对手的能力，但其价值受自适应影响，且通信与信号演化需共同评估。
AI 中文摘要
通信何时能帮助群体识别隐藏的对手，以及随着群体自适应，其价值如何变化？在黑手党游戏中，知情少数派隐藏在不知情多数派之中，后者唯一的证据是公开的玩法。零信息游戏（每天投票随机淘汰一名玩家）被精确求解，并对每个社会进行评分；协议之间的匹配对照比较识别出通信的影响。由8-100个claude-haiku-4-5代理组成的社会（分析了7416场游戏，190万次模型调用）通过重写和继承私人策略笔记进行自适应。同时广播在所有九种测试组合（8-46名玩家）中都比沉默更能提高对手识别能力。轮流发言消除了大部分优势；其投票压倒性胜利的频率与广播相同，但落在黑手党上的概率接近随机（1.08倍对比2.53倍）。在70名玩家时，每天阅读八条陈述的代理识别对手的能力比沉默的代理更差，且有限对话的价值低于46名玩家时。自适应很快但未必有帮助。在首次广播游戏中，公民宣布自己角色的频率远高于黑手党（91%对比30%），且首日投票发现黑手党的概率是随机的三倍；在两代之内，公民停止宣布，该线索消失，这一变化由继承的笔记承载。在16名玩家的受控重新部署中，携带六十代自身笔记的社会得分低于没有笔记的社会。通信既塑造集体推理，也塑造其依赖的信号，因此协议的价值必须与改变这些信号的自适应一起衡量。
英文摘要
When does communication help a group identify hidden adversaries, and how does its value change as the group adapts? In Mafia, an informed minority hides inside an uninformed majority whose only evidence is open play. The zero-information game, where each day's vote eliminates a random player, is exactly solved and scores every society; matched-casting comparisons between protocols identify the effect of communication. Societies of 8-100 claude-haiku-4-5 agents (7,416 analyzed games, 1.9M model calls) adapt by rewriting and inheriting private strategy notes. Simultaneous broadcast improves adversary identification over silence in all nine compositions tested (8-46 players). Turn-taking removes most of this advantage; its voting landslides are as frequent as broadcast's but land on mafia near chance (1.08x versus 2.53x). At 70 players, agents reading eight statements per day identify adversaries worse than silent ones, and limited talk is worth less than at 46 players. Adaptation is fast but need not help. In their first broadcast games, citizens announce their role far more often than mafia (91% vs. 30%) and first-day votes find mafia at three times chance; within two generations citizens stop announcing and the cue fades, a change the inherited notes carry. In controlled redeployments at 16 players, societies carrying sixty generations of their own notes score below societies with none. Communication shapes both collective inference and the signals it depends on, so a protocol's value must be measured together with the adaptation that changes those signals.
