Decomposition Buys Integrity, Not Yield
Abstract
Multi-agent systems split a task across a tree of agents and justify the split with folklore: smaller contexts, cleaner separation, parallelism. We ask what the split does to how much of what the leaves discover reaches the root. Model a decomposition as a tree in which an agent handed $b$ items keeps any one with probability $r(b)$. If $r(b)=1/b$, every tree delivers exactly one finding, for every task size and every shape; we verify this to $2.4 \times 10^{-15}$ on 20,000 random irregular tree...
Description / Details
Multi-agent systems split a task across a tree of agents and justify the split with folklore: smaller contexts, cleaner separation, parallelism. We ask what the split does to how much of what the leaves discover reaches the root. Model a decomposition as a tree in which an agent handed items keeps any one with probability . If , every tree delivers exactly one finding, for every task size and every shape; we verify this to on 20,000 random irregular trees. If , a depth- tree over findings yields : task size and architecture separate, and architecture contributes only per level, so flat is optimal for yield and no arrangement of agents escapes the exponent . On 600 production deep-research traces [0.30, 0.38], by three identifications that do not share a failure mode. At a hop where item boundaries come from the tool rather than a text heuristic, and where occurs 550 times, [0.527, 0.615] is observed rather than extrapolated, over 16,082 hops. A tier also costs alignment: on 1,012 annotated multi-agent traces one brief in sixteen goes off-target, giving and a per-tier penalty . Depth is bought on two other axes. The root context is the only state that persists and the only one that cannot cheaply forget, and depth cuts its exposure from items to . Depth is also cheaper: production flat agents bill as , not the an append-only context predicts, and at equal spend two tiers overtake flat at 403 findings. Across every parameter we measured the model says 0.7% to 11.3% of production sessions are worth delegating, against 7.8% that do. A hazard model on 743,819 production tool calls finds that delegation does not respond to a filling context and is instead an opening move.
Source: arXiv:2609.17464v1 - http://arxiv.org/abs/2609.17464v1 PDF: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2609.17464v1 Original Link: http://arxiv.org/abs/2609.17464v1
Please sign in to join the discussion.
No comments yet. Be the first to share your thoughts!
Sep 16, 2026
Artificial Intelligence
AI
0