But as of now, even newer AI models are not particularly insightful. I'm always surprised by how suboptimal near-frontier LLMs are at collaborating in some of the easier cooperative environments on my benchmarking and RL platform. For example, check out a replay of consensus grid here: https://gertlabs.com/spectate
Do you tell them to think and coordinate the next step through some type of sync/talking mechanism or is it turn by turn?
I suspect turn by turn as it is similiar to other experiements and in this case, it wouldn't work because they wouldn't have a certain amount of time to think about the next step together?
So that does make the game more challenging, versus some other simulations we have where multiple conversation turns happen before action. But the inefficiencies I'm describing are different; for example, an agent reaches part of the destination area but is clearly blocking another player who needs to pass, and most models will just stay put instead of moving along to another target spot.
I have a /red-team skill that will use an agent team to criticize it's own work, grade and rank feedback, incorporate relevant feedback and then start over. It has increased the quality of output.
What I haven’t taken time for is finding out about how I‘d automate their back-and-forth and stop manually copy/pasting their responses.
oldsecondhand•1h ago
gavmor•1h ago
From what I've read, for each token or input patch, the gate computes a set of probabilities (or scores) over the experts, then selects a small subset (often the top‑[k]) and routes that input only to those.
Ie each expert computes its own transformation on the same original input (or a shared intermediate representation), and then their outputs are combined at the next layer via the gate’s weights.
That’s post hoc combination, not B reasoning over A’s reasoning.
AntiUSAbah•20m ago
AI agents discussing things with each others would be more like one thinking model thinking throught the problem with different personas.
With different underlying models, you can leverage the best model for one persona. Like people said before (6 month ago, no clue if this is still valid) that they prefer GPT for planning and Claude for executing / coding.