Stanford论文：多人各用一个Agent争抢共享资源反而不如单一Agent统一调度
Stanford新论文发现，在共享预算或日历这类共享资源上，1个统一服务所有人的Agent表现优于每人各配1个Agent，结论跨5个前沿模型成立。实验中各Agent虽对自身用户合理，但合在一起会互相覆盖、随团队规模扩大而停滞，在2个环境中无通信时彻底崩溃；在有争议的token预算上，Opus 5团队只拿到可达价值的30%，而单一协调Agent拿到64%。
New Stanford paper finds that when each person's agent acts alone on a shared resource, the group does worse than 1 agent serving everyone.
A shared budget or calendar is handled better by 1 agent serving everyone than by 1 agent per user, across 5 frontier models.
Each agent does a sensible job for its own user.
Together they overwrite each other, stall as the team grows, and with no channel they collapsed outright in 2 environments.
On a contested token budget, Opus 5 teams captured 30% of the achievable value against 64% for 1 coordinating agent.
Agents invented facts about other users in more than half of Claude team episodes in the group-ordering environment.
Prefer 1 agent holding everyone's constraints, and if you run 1 per user, make reading peers a condition of committing.
来源：rohanpaul_ai · x.com