Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This study investigates how different memory architectures influence the emergence of a shared language in LLM agents participating in a Lewis signaling game. The findings reveal that agents equipped with a persistent private notebook significantly outperform stateless agents, achieving reliable coordination even at higher channel capacities, while stateless agents experience performance degradation as vocabulary complexity increases. The research highlights that memory architecture is a critical factor in transforming interaction history into stable linguistic conventions, challenging the assumption that channel capacity alone dictates communication efficacy.
Memory architecture trumps channel capacity in enabling LLM agents to develop a robust shared language, revealing surprising fragility in stateless designs.
How do two agents invent a shared language from scratch? In a Lewis signaling game, a sender and receiver must coordinate on a code using only their interaction history. We study five memory architectures across varying channel configurations with LLM agents and find that memory architecture matters more than channel capacity. Agents with a persistent private notebook benefit from surplus channel capacity and avoid the high-capacity collapse seen in stateless agents, achieving the most reliable coordination ($0.867 \pm 0.023$ at capacity = 25). Stateless agents peak at moderate capacity and then degrade as the vocabulary grows beyond what a rolling context window can track The notebook externalizes learned conventions, freeing agents from having to re-derive codes each round. An information bottleneck-inspired argument predicts an optimal capacity equal to the number of objects. Instead, the bottleneck (capacity = 8) proves to be a fragility point, and surplus capacity is generally better. We show that channel capacity alone cannot predict coordination; memory architecture determines whether agents turn interaction history into stable conventions, and both dimensions are needed to understand how signals become language.
