arXiv · 2605.09128
Internal vs. External: Comparing Deliberation and Evolution for Multi-Agent Constitutional Design
Abstract
Multi-agent AI systems need behavioral constitutions, but it is unresolved whether such rules should emerge internally through agent self-governance or be discovered externally through optimization. We present the first controlled comparison of internal deliberation and external evolution across three social environments: a coordination grid-world, an iterated public goods game, and a bilateral trading market. Across 180 simulation runs, evolution significantly outperforms deliberation in collective-action settings (p < 0.01), while neither method improves outcomes in bilateral trading. A multiplier ablation reveals that evolution's advantage inverts when incentives shift: at pool multiplier (m = 0.75) the evolved constitution forces value-destroying cooperation and becomes the worst-performing method. Notably, no deliberation run across thirty trials ever proposed punishment -- the canonical cooperation-sustaining mechanism evolution reliably discovers -- suggesting external optimization wins on peaks while internal self-governance trades peaks for structural responsiveness.
Explore related subjects
Keep this discovery
Hershraj Niranjani, Ujwal Kumar, Phan Xuan Tan. 2026-05-09. Internal vs. External: Comparing Deliberation and Evolution for Multi-Agent Constitutional Design. https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.09128
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.