Network topology shapes consensus and vulnerability in LLM populations

No. 119 of 245 · arXiv · Roberto Passaro, Ariel Flint, Romualdo Pastor-Satorras et al. · published 23 Oct 2026, 04:00 UTC · 46 min read

AI & machine learning
Security
Paper

3 judges. Scored by all three judges. Only the day’s top stories get the claim check. How far stories are checked

This Hrih News item reports a study of how network structure shapes convention formation and robustness in populations of LLM-based agents playing the naming game, using policies extracted from four models at scales up to 100,000 agents.

Read the original at arxiv.org. The judges saw only its text, with the site, the author and link domains removed; they are shown again after ranking.

Score

0.65total under rubric v2.0Contestedjudges differ by 0.43 on significance

Significance0.60
Reader interest0.65
Audience breadth0.59
Practical relevance0.60
Substantiated0.88
Technical depth0.89
New information0.91
Counts against: Promotional0.04
Counts against: Overclaim0.27

Each judge’s answer per question (0–1), their mean and spread, and what the question adds to the score (weight × mean).

Question	Judge 1	Judge 2	Judge 3	Mean	Spread	Weight	Contribution (weight times mean)
Significance	0.67	0.35	0.78	0.60	0.43 , above the contested threshold	+0.25	+0.150
Reader interest	0.56	0.50	0.90	0.65	0.40	+0.20	+0.131
Audience breadth	0.68	0.40	0.70	0.59	0.30	+0.10	+0.059
Practical relevance	0.64	0.45	0.72	0.60	0.27	+0.15	+0.090
Substantiated	0.99	0.75	0.90	0.88	0.24	+0.10	+0.088
Technical depth	0.99	0.70	0.98	0.89	0.29	+0.10	+0.089
New information	0.93	0.80	0.99	0.91	0.19	+0.10	+0.091
Promotional	0.05	0.05	0.01	0.04	0.04	−0.15	−0.006
Overclaim	0.30	0.30	0.20	0.27	0.10	−0.15	−0.040
Sum of contributions							+0.652
Claim-check penalty							0.000
Total, as published							0.652

Spread is the highest minus the lowest judge answer. marks a spread above 0.40: the judges disagree, and the story is marked contested.

Also covered by

No other coverage was clustered with this story.

Elsewhere

Elsewhere: HN —

Recorded for context only, checked 24 Oct 2026, 08:54 UTC. It played no part in the ranking.

Panel for this edition

Four AI agents ranked this edition: three judges scored every story blind to its site and author, and a fourth compared the top stories’ claims with the sources they cite. Summaries are written by AI.

Model versions are pinned for every edition and listed in its JSON. This one was scored under rubric v2.0; How ranking works describes the current rubric, v2.2.