{"id":"0f43fbad9cd9274d7bf16e8aee8ea6c1c6ecc6bdb5d7ee2a65c04d57969983aa","title":"arXiv cs.AI: Phantom Consensus: Measuring Social Reasoning in Multi-Agent LLM Decision-Making","argument":"Disha Sheshanarayana, Rajat Subhra Pal, Manjira Sinha and Tirthankar Dasgupta call it “phantom consensus” when LLM agents shift public decisions after ambiguous social signals and misreport what others privately judged, although recorded private judgments do not support the apparent agreement. Their PHANTOM-Bench separates private judgments, public decisions, estimates of others’ judgments, transparency-based recovery and control conditions. Across nine closed- and open-weight models, the authors report that ambiguous public signals degraded decision quality and sometimes turned correct private group judgments into incorrect public outcomes. Public accuracy fell by as much as 47.8 percentage points, and collective rationality failures reached 47.3% in the most susceptible setting. Revealing recorded private decisions repaired many failures without revealing the gold label, but recovery varied across models. The authors argue that evaluating multi-agent LLM systems requires checking whether apparent agreement reflects independently measured private judgments, not just measuring final agreement. The abstract describes controlled collectives; it does not establish how often this pattern occurs in deployed systems.","topicIds":["intelligence-and-discovery"],"domain":"science","claimType":"attributed reading","limits":"The abstract describes results in controlled LLM collectives and does not establish how often phantom consensus occurs in deployed systems. The abstract reports results across nine models but does not identify them or provide further methodological detail in the supplied evidence.","speaker":{"name":"Sheshanarayana, Disha, Pal, Rajat Subhra, Sinha, Manjira, Dasgupta, Tirthankar","roleAtSource":"Article author"},"source":{"title":"Phantom Consensus: Measuring Social Reasoning in Multi-Agent LLM Decision-Making","publisher":"arXiv cs.AI","format":"Article","url":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.08971","publishedAt":"2026-11-06","dateBasis":"Date basis not provided."},"evidence":[{"text":"The authors define phantom consensus as public decision shifts after ambiguous social signals paired with inaccurate reports of other agents’ private judgments, despite private judgments not supporting the apparent consensus.","excerpt":"LLMs shift their public decisions after observing ambiguous social signals while reporting inaccurate estimates of what other agents privately judged","url":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.08971","relationship":"Source-stated"},{"text":"PHANTOM-Bench measures private judgments, public decisions after ambiguous signals, estimates of group judgments, transparency-based recovery and control conditions.","excerpt":"we introduce PHANTOM-Bench, a benchmark that separates isolated private judgments, public decisions after ambiguous social signals","url":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.08971","relationship":"Source-stated"},{"text":"Across nine models, the authors report that ambiguous public signals degraded decision quality and could turn correct private group judgments into incorrect public outcomes.","excerpt":"Across nine closed- and open-weight models, ambiguous public signals consistently degrade decision quality and can turn correct private group judgments into incorrect public collective outcomes.","url":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.08971","relationship":"Source-stated"},{"text":"The authors report public accuracy drops of up to 47.8 percentage points and collective rationality failures reaching 47.3% in the most susceptible setting.","excerpt":"Public accuracy drops by as much as 47.8 percentage points, and collective rationality failures reach 47.3% in the most susceptible setting.","url":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.08971","relationship":"Source-stated"},{"text":"Revealing recorded private decisions repaired many failures without revealing the gold label, with recovery varying across models.","excerpt":"Revealing the agents' recorded private decisions repairs many failures without revealing the gold label, although recovery varies across models.","url":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.08971","relationship":"Source-stated"},{"text":"The authors argue that evaluation should test whether apparent agreement reflects independently measured private judgments, not only final agreement.","excerpt":"evaluating multi-agent LLM systems requires measuring not only final agreement, but whether that agreement reflects independently measured private judgments","url":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.08971","relationship":"Source-stated"}],"sourceMedia":{"status":"not_found","sourceUrl":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.08971","checkedAt":"2026-11-12T14:06:22.559Z","items":[],"note":"No suitable media was found by the supported page extraction."},"assumptions":[],"openQuestion":{"attribution":"Open question","text":"Do these effects also occur outside the controlled LLM collectives studied here?"},"whatWouldChangeView":{"attribution":"Change condition not recorded","text":""},"editorialComparisons":[],"live":{"title":"arXiv cs.AI: Phantom Consensus: Measuring Social Reasoning in Multi-Agent LLM Decision-Making","summary":"Disha Sheshanarayana, Rajat Subhra Pal, Manjira Sinha and Tirthankar Dasgupta call it “phantom consensus” when LLM agents shift public decisions after ambiguous social signals and misreport what others privately judged, although recorded private judgments do not support the apparent agreement. Their PHANTOM-Bench separates private judgments, public decisions, estimates of others’ judgments, transparency-based recovery and control conditions. Across nine closed- and open-weight models, the authors report that ambiguous public signals degraded decision quality and sometimes turned correct private group judgments into incorrect public outcomes. Public accuracy fell by as much as 47.8 percentage points, and collective rationality failures reached 47.3% in the most susceptible setting. Revealing recorded private decisions repaired many failures without revealing the gold label, but recovery varied across models. The authors argue that evaluating multi-agent LLM systems requires checking whether apparent agreement reflects independently measured private judgments, not just measuring final agreement. The abstract describes controlled collectives; it does not establish how often this pattern occurs in deployed systems.","question":"Do these effects also occur outside the controlled LLM collectives studied here?","claims":[{"text":"The authors define phantom consensus as public decision shifts after ambiguous social signals paired with inaccurate reports of other agents’ private judgments, despite private judgments not supporting the apparent consensus.","excerpt":"LLMs shift their public decisions after observing ambiguous social signals while reporting inaccurate estimates of what other agents privately judged","support":"source-stated"},{"text":"PHANTOM-Bench measures private judgments, public decisions after ambiguous signals, estimates of group judgments, transparency-based recovery and control conditions.","excerpt":"we introduce PHANTOM-Bench, a benchmark that separates isolated private judgments, public decisions after ambiguous social signals","support":"source-stated"},{"text":"Across nine models, the authors report that ambiguous public signals degraded decision quality and could turn correct private group judgments into incorrect public outcomes.","excerpt":"Across nine closed- and open-weight models, ambiguous public signals consistently degrade decision quality and can turn correct private group judgments into incorrect public collective outcomes.","support":"source-stated"},{"text":"The authors report public accuracy drops of up to 47.8 percentage points and collective rationality failures reaching 47.3% in the most susceptible setting.","excerpt":"Public accuracy drops by as much as 47.8 percentage points, and collective rationality failures reach 47.3% in the most susceptible setting.","support":"source-stated"},{"text":"Revealing recorded private decisions repaired many failures without revealing the gold label, with recovery varying across models.","excerpt":"Revealing the agents' recorded private decisions repairs many failures without revealing the gold label, although recovery varies across models.","support":"source-stated"},{"text":"The authors argue that evaluation should test whether apparent agreement reflects independently measured private judgments, not only final agreement.","excerpt":"evaluating multi-agent LLM systems requires measuring not only final agreement, but whether that agreement reflects independently measured private judgments","support":"source-stated"}],"limitations":["The abstract describes results in controlled LLM collectives and does not establish how often phantom consensus occurs in deployed systems.","The abstract reports results across nine models but does not identify them or provide further methodological detail in the supplied evidence."],"mediaId":"5db638a14cb0ff87507b959836d2b668e0368d1950a4a97bdc231abcc8f2dbb2","correctionReason":null,"id":"0f43fbad9cd9274d7bf16e8aee8ea6c1c6ecc6bdb5d7ee2a65c04d57969983aa","publicationId":"9892e5e1-6405-4fab-8164-1a1b21b81f4c","version":1,"sourceUrl":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.08971","sourceTitle":"Phantom Consensus: Measuring Social Reasoning in Multi-Agent LLM Decision-Making","publisher":"arXiv cs.AI","publishedAt":null,"originalPublished":{"value":"2026-11-06","precision":"day","basis":"publisher_citation_date"},"firstObservedAt":"2026-11-09T05:00:53.259Z","createdAt":"2026-11-12T13:34:35.041Z","historical":true,"entityIds":["arxiv"],"topicIds":["intelligence-and-discovery"],"media":[{"id":"5db638a14cb0ff87507b959836d2b668e0368d1950a4a97bdc231abcc8f2dbb2","kind":"article","url":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.08971","sourceUrl":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.08971","label":"Read original","provenance":"source_link","verification":{"status":"verified","checkedAt":"2026-11-12T13:33:16.081Z","method":"acquired_source","contentType":"text/html"},"recommendationReason":"Recommended by Jev for understanding this source; checked by Luna."}],"sourceMedia":{"status":"not_found","sourceUrl":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.08971","checkedAt":"2026-11-12T14:06:22.559Z","items":[],"note":"No suitable media was found by the supported page extraction."},"editorialDecision":{"outcome":"accept","reasonCodes":["material_development"],"rubricVersion":"stream-admission-v6","mediaId":"5db638a14cb0ff87507b959836d2b668e0368d1950a4a97bdc231abcc8f2dbb2","confidence":0.54,"provider":"typesafe","model":"jev-1.13.0","inputHash":"996f0569dc3b9daefb44607371423ff8dd16b39c22e87b0b815f1a18e5eacfec","decidedAt":"2026-11-12T13:33:19.246Z"},"provenance":{"textHash":"34629a5ae581a59cfb20e348dc4c57433f664822d557a8b2fcb168666675d4d5","observationId":"39046139d2e0f70b7e3dd8f427339e15cb27d31129da342f353fe292464a9b48","retrievedAt":"2026-11-12T13:33:15.630Z","kind":"publisher-page","preparer":{"model":"gpt-6-luna","runId":"0821ad3e-95b7-446b-8438-cb37924fa7c4"},"reviewer":{"model":"gpt-6-luna","runId":"a3359c3a-113e-49bd-88aa-0e76fce25aa9"}},"audit":{"status":"uncertain","reviewedAt":"2026-11-12T13:34:35.041Z","model":"anthropic/claude-opus-5.5"},"sourceAttribution":{"authors":[{"name":"Sheshanarayana, Disha","url":null,"kind":"unknown"},{"name":"Pal, Rajat Subhra","url":null,"kind":"unknown"},{"name":"Sinha, Manjira","url":null,"kind":"unknown"},{"name":"Dasgupta, Tirthankar","url":null,"kind":"unknown"}],"authorRole":"article-author","hosts":[],"status":"stated","authorRoster":{"truncated":false,"omitted":0,"assertionGroupsOmitted":0},"participation":[{"actor":{"name":"Sheshanarayana, Disha","url":null,"kind":"unknown","actorId":null},"role":"author","scope":{"kind":"work-credit","locator":null},"literalCredit":"Sheshanarayana, Disha","status":"stated","provenance":{"basis":"head-meta","sourceUrl":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.08971","locator":"head/meta[name=author|citation_author]"},"assertionId":"7b0ce9de108021711ae098fdd0cb07601bee22577c11c3c8eb152ca27409309d:participation:0","identity":{"version":"entity-identity-v1","status":"unresolved","actorId":null,"canonicalActorId":null,"candidateActorIds":[],"assertions":[],"sourceObservedAt":"2026-11-12T14:06:22.559Z","knowledgeAsOf":null},"sourceVersion":{"snapshotId":"7b0ce9de108021711ae098fdd0cb07601bee22577c11c3c8eb152ca27409309d","sourceUrl":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.08971","contentSha256":"88413e2c0d8b18b40b85d17c6063f459ce83d1e5746c997c0deeeb96cb69f9a9","textHash":"34629a5ae581a59cfb20e348dc4c57433f664822d557a8b2fcb168666675d4d5","observedAt":"2026-11-12T14:06:22.559Z"}},{"actor":{"name":"Pal, Rajat Subhra","url":null,"kind":"unknown","actorId":null},"role":"author","scope":{"kind":"work-credit","locator":null},"literalCredit":"Pal, Rajat Subhra","status":"stated","provenance":{"basis":"head-meta","sourceUrl":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.08971","locator":"head/meta[name=author|citation_author]"},"assertionId":"7b0ce9de108021711ae098fdd0cb07601bee22577c11c3c8eb152ca27409309d:participation:1","identity":{"version":"entity-identity-v1","status":"unresolved","actorId":null,"canonicalActorId":null,"candidateActorIds":[],"assertions":[],"sourceObservedAt":"2026-11-12T14:06:22.559Z","knowledgeAsOf":null},"sourceVersion":{"snapshotId":"7b0ce9de108021711ae098fdd0cb07601bee22577c11c3c8eb152ca27409309d","sourceUrl":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.08971","contentSha256":"88413e2c0d8b18b40b85d17c6063f459ce83d1e5746c997c0deeeb96cb69f9a9","textHash":"34629a5ae581a59cfb20e348dc4c57433f664822d557a8b2fcb168666675d4d5","observedAt":"2026-11-12T14:06:22.559Z"}},{"actor":{"name":"Sinha, Manjira","url":null,"kind":"unknown","actorId":null},"role":"author","scope":{"kind":"work-credit","locator":null},"literalCredit":"Sinha, Manjira","status":"stated","provenance":{"basis":"head-meta","sourceUrl":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.08971","locator":"head/meta[name=author|citation_author]"},"assertionId":"7b0ce9de108021711ae098fdd0cb07601bee22577c11c3c8eb152ca27409309d:participation:2","identity":{"version":"entity-identity-v1","status":"unresolved","actorId":null,"canonicalActorId":null,"candidateActorIds":[],"assertions":[],"sourceObservedAt":"2026-11-12T14:06:22.559Z","knowledgeAsOf":null},"sourceVersion":{"snapshotId":"7b0ce9de108021711ae098fdd0cb07601bee22577c11c3c8eb152ca27409309d","sourceUrl":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.08971","contentSha256":"88413e2c0d8b18b40b85d17c6063f459ce83d1e5746c997c0deeeb96cb69f9a9","textHash":"34629a5ae581a59cfb20e348dc4c57433f664822d557a8b2fcb168666675d4d5","observedAt":"2026-11-12T14:06:22.559Z"}},{"actor":{"name":"Dasgupta, Tirthankar","url":null,"kind":"unknown","actorId":null},"role":"author","scope":{"kind":"work-credit","locator":null},"literalCredit":"Dasgupta, Tirthankar","status":"stated","provenance":{"basis":"head-meta","sourceUrl":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.08971","locator":"head/meta[name=author|citation_author]"},"assertionId":"7b0ce9de108021711ae098fdd0cb07601bee22577c11c3c8eb152ca27409309d:participation:3","identity":{"version":"entity-identity-v1","status":"unresolved","actorId":null,"canonicalActorId":null,"candidateActorIds":[],"assertions":[],"sourceObservedAt":"2026-11-12T14:06:22.559Z","knowledgeAsOf":null},"sourceVersion":{"snapshotId":"7b0ce9de108021711ae098fdd0cb07601bee22577c11c3c8eb152ca27409309d","sourceUrl":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.08971","contentSha256":"88413e2c0d8b18b40b85d17c6063f459ce83d1e5746c997c0deeeb96cb69f9a9","textHash":"34629a5ae581a59cfb20e348dc4c57433f664822d557a8b2fcb168666675d4d5","observedAt":"2026-11-12T14:06:22.559Z"}}],"participationCoverage":{"total":4,"returned":4,"complete":true,"fullAssertions":"source-metadata-endpoint"},"distribution":null,"publisher":null,"sourceUrl":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.08971","snapshotId":"7b0ce9de108021711ae098fdd0cb07601bee22577c11c3c8eb152ca27409309d","contentSha256":"88413e2c0d8b18b40b85d17c6063f459ce83d1e5746c997c0deeeb96cb69f9a9","textHash":"34629a5ae581a59cfb20e348dc4c57433f664822d557a8b2fcb168666675d4d5","observedAt":"2026-11-12T14:06:22.559Z","basis":"publisher-page-metadata","sourceLinks":44,"linksTruncated":false,"metadataUrl":"/api/pipeline/stream/0f43fbad9cd9274d7bf16e8aee8ea6c1c6ecc6bdb5d7ee2a65c04d57969983aa/source"}},"canonicalUrl":"https://escapemeridian.com/readings/arxiv-cs-ai-phantom-consensus-measuring-social-reasoning-in-0f43fbad","formats":{"html":"/readings/arxiv-cs-ai-phantom-consensus-measuring-social-reasoning-in-0f43fbad","markdown":"/readings/arxiv-cs-ai-phantom-consensus-measuring-social-reasoning-in-0f43fbad.md","json":"/readings/arxiv-cs-ai-phantom-consensus-measuring-social-reasoning-in-0f43fbad.json"},"attribution":"Headline and summary by Escape Meridian, prepared by Luna from the attributed source. A source check is not independent confirmation of the source’s claims.","maintainedGuideLinks":[],"readerContext":{"version":"reader-context-v1","attribution":"Reference context selected by Escape Meridian; separate from source evidence. Entity mentions do not establish authorship, involvement or endorsement.","terms":[{"id":"term-llm","name":"Large language model","explanation":"A language model with many learned numerical settings, used to process and generate language.","referenceUrl":"https://developers.google.com/machine-learning/glossary#large-language-model"},{"id":"term-open-weights","name":"Open weights","explanation":"A model whose trained numbers are published so others can download, run and inspect it; the license and training data may still be restricted.","referenceUrl":"https://opensource.org/ai/open-weights"}],"entities":[{"id":"arxiv","name":"arXiv","kind":"organization","context":"arXiv is a research manuscript repository where authors share papers that may not yet have been peer reviewed.","referenceUrls":["https://arxiv.org/","https://info.arxiv.org/help/api/index.html"],"path":"/entities/arxiv","json":"/entities/arxiv.json","markdown":"/entities/arxiv.md"}]},"researchQuestions":[],"withdrawn":false,"references":{"schemaVersion":1,"target":{"type":"reading","id":"0f43fbad9cd9274d7bf16e8aee8ea6c1c6ecc6bdb5d7ee2a65c04d57969983aa","revision":"9892e5e1-6405-4fab-8164-1a1b21b81f4c","revisionKind":"publication-id","title":"arXiv cs.AI: Phantom Consensus: Measuring Social Reasoning in Multi-Agent LLM Decision-Making","url":"https://escapemeridian.com/readings/arxiv-cs-ai-phantom-consensus-measuring-social-reasoning-in-0f43fbad"},"source":{"type":"source","id":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.08971","revision":"34629a5ae581a59cfb20e348dc4c57433f664822d557a8b2fcb168666675d4d5","revisionKind":"sha256-source-text","title":"Phantom Consensus: Measuring Social Reasoning in Multi-Agent LLM Decision-Making","url":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.08971"},"status":"available","items":[],"next":null,"scope":"Explicit citations in public readings and public file attachments to this reading. Shared topics are not citations. Other artifact types need an explicit reference adapter."},"revisions":[{"id":"0f43fbad9cd9274d7bf16e8aee8ea6c1c6ecc6bdb5d7ee2a65c04d57969983aa","title":"arXiv cs.AI: Phantom Consensus: Measuring Social Reasoning in Multi-Agent LLM Decision-Making","argument":"Disha Sheshanarayana, Rajat Subhra Pal, Manjira Sinha and Tirthankar Dasgupta call it “phantom consensus” when LLM agents shift public decisions after ambiguous social signals and misreport what others privately judged, although recorded private judgments do not support the apparent agreement. Their PHANTOM-Bench separates private judgments, public decisions, estimates of others’ judgments, transparency-based recovery and control conditions. Across nine closed- and open-weight models, the authors report that ambiguous public signals degraded decision quality and sometimes turned correct private group judgments into incorrect public outcomes. Public accuracy fell by as much as 47.8 percentage points, and collective rationality failures reached 47.3% in the most susceptible setting. Revealing recorded private decisions repaired many failures without revealing the gold label, but recovery varied across models. The authors argue that evaluating multi-agent LLM systems requires checking whether apparent agreement reflects independently measured private judgments, not just measuring final agreement. The abstract describes controlled collectives; it does not establish how often this pattern occurs in deployed systems.","topicIds":["intelligence-and-discovery"],"domain":"science","claimType":"attributed reading","limits":"The abstract describes results in controlled LLM collectives and does not establish how often phantom consensus occurs in deployed systems. The abstract reports results across nine models but does not identify them or provide further methodological detail in the supplied evidence.","speaker":{"name":"Sheshanarayana, Disha, Pal, Rajat Subhra, Sinha, Manjira, Dasgupta, Tirthankar","roleAtSource":"Article author"},"source":{"title":"Phantom Consensus: Measuring Social Reasoning in Multi-Agent LLM Decision-Making","publisher":"arXiv cs.AI","format":"Article","url":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.08971","publishedAt":"2026-11-06","dateBasis":"Date basis not provided."},"evidence":[{"text":"The authors define phantom consensus as public decision shifts after ambiguous social signals paired with inaccurate reports of other agents’ private judgments, despite private judgments not supporting the apparent consensus.","excerpt":"LLMs shift their public decisions after observing ambiguous social signals while reporting inaccurate estimates of what other agents privately judged","url":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.08971","relationship":"Source-stated"},{"text":"PHANTOM-Bench measures private judgments, public decisions after ambiguous signals, estimates of group judgments, transparency-based recovery and control conditions.","excerpt":"we introduce PHANTOM-Bench, a benchmark that separates isolated private judgments, public decisions after ambiguous social signals","url":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.08971","relationship":"Source-stated"},{"text":"Across nine models, the authors report that ambiguous public signals degraded decision quality and could turn correct private group judgments into incorrect public outcomes.","excerpt":"Across nine closed- and open-weight models, ambiguous public signals consistently degrade decision quality and can turn correct private group judgments into incorrect public collective outcomes.","url":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.08971","relationship":"Source-stated"},{"text":"The authors report public accuracy drops of up to 47.8 percentage points and collective rationality failures reaching 47.3% in the most susceptible setting.","excerpt":"Public accuracy drops by as much as 47.8 percentage points, and collective rationality failures reach 47.3% in the most susceptible setting.","url":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.08971","relationship":"Source-stated"},{"text":"Revealing recorded private decisions repaired many failures without revealing the gold label, with recovery varying across models.","excerpt":"Revealing the agents' recorded private decisions repairs many failures without revealing the gold label, although recovery varies across models.","url":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.08971","relationship":"Source-stated"},{"text":"The authors argue that evaluation should test whether apparent agreement reflects independently measured private judgments, not only final agreement.","excerpt":"evaluating multi-agent LLM systems requires measuring not only final agreement, but whether that agreement reflects independently measured private judgments","url":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.08971","relationship":"Source-stated"}],"sourceMedia":{"status":"not_found","sourceUrl":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.08971","checkedAt":"2026-11-12T14:06:22.559Z","items":[],"note":"No suitable media was found by the supported page extraction."},"assumptions":[],"openQuestion":{"attribution":"Open question","text":"Do these effects also occur outside the controlled LLM collectives studied here?"},"whatWouldChangeView":{"attribution":"Change condition not recorded","text":""},"editorialComparisons":[],"live":{"title":"arXiv cs.AI: Phantom Consensus: Measuring Social Reasoning in Multi-Agent LLM Decision-Making","summary":"Disha Sheshanarayana, Rajat Subhra Pal, Manjira Sinha and Tirthankar Dasgupta call it “phantom consensus” when LLM agents shift public decisions after ambiguous social signals and misreport what others privately judged, although recorded private judgments do not support the apparent agreement. Their PHANTOM-Bench separates private judgments, public decisions, estimates of others’ judgments, transparency-based recovery and control conditions. Across nine closed- and open-weight models, the authors report that ambiguous public signals degraded decision quality and sometimes turned correct private group judgments into incorrect public outcomes. Public accuracy fell by as much as 47.8 percentage points, and collective rationality failures reached 47.3% in the most susceptible setting. Revealing recorded private decisions repaired many failures without revealing the gold label, but recovery varied across models. The authors argue that evaluating multi-agent LLM systems requires checking whether apparent agreement reflects independently measured private judgments, not just measuring final agreement. The abstract describes controlled collectives; it does not establish how often this pattern occurs in deployed systems.","question":"Do these effects also occur outside the controlled LLM collectives studied here?","claims":[{"text":"The authors define phantom consensus as public decision shifts after ambiguous social signals paired with inaccurate reports of other agents’ private judgments, despite private judgments not supporting the apparent consensus.","excerpt":"LLMs shift their public decisions after observing ambiguous social signals while reporting inaccurate estimates of what other agents privately judged","support":"source-stated"},{"text":"PHANTOM-Bench measures private judgments, public decisions after ambiguous signals, estimates of group judgments, transparency-based recovery and control conditions.","excerpt":"we introduce PHANTOM-Bench, a benchmark that separates isolated private judgments, public decisions after ambiguous social signals","support":"source-stated"},{"text":"Across nine models, the authors report that ambiguous public signals degraded decision quality and could turn correct private group judgments into incorrect public outcomes.","excerpt":"Across nine closed- and open-weight models, ambiguous public signals consistently degrade decision quality and can turn correct private group judgments into incorrect public collective outcomes.","support":"source-stated"},{"text":"The authors report public accuracy drops of up to 47.8 percentage points and collective rationality failures reaching 47.3% in the most susceptible setting.","excerpt":"Public accuracy drops by as much as 47.8 percentage points, and collective rationality failures reach 47.3% in the most susceptible setting.","support":"source-stated"},{"text":"Revealing recorded private decisions repaired many failures without revealing the gold label, with recovery varying across models.","excerpt":"Revealing the agents' recorded private decisions repairs many failures without revealing the gold label, although recovery varies across models.","support":"source-stated"},{"text":"The authors argue that evaluation should test whether apparent agreement reflects independently measured private judgments, not only final agreement.","excerpt":"evaluating multi-agent LLM systems requires measuring not only final agreement, but whether that agreement reflects independently measured private judgments","support":"source-stated"}],"limitations":["The abstract describes results in controlled LLM collectives and does not establish how often phantom consensus occurs in deployed systems.","The abstract reports results across nine models but does not identify them or provide further methodological detail in the supplied evidence."],"mediaId":"5db638a14cb0ff87507b959836d2b668e0368d1950a4a97bdc231abcc8f2dbb2","correctionReason":null,"id":"0f43fbad9cd9274d7bf16e8aee8ea6c1c6ecc6bdb5d7ee2a65c04d57969983aa","publicationId":"9892e5e1-6405-4fab-8164-1a1b21b81f4c","version":1,"sourceUrl":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.08971","sourceTitle":"Phantom Consensus: Measuring Social Reasoning in Multi-Agent LLM Decision-Making","publisher":"arXiv cs.AI","publishedAt":null,"originalPublished":{"value":"2026-11-06","precision":"day","basis":"publisher_citation_date"},"firstObservedAt":"2026-11-09T05:00:53.259Z","createdAt":"2026-11-12T13:34:35.041Z","historical":true,"entityIds":["arxiv"],"topicIds":["intelligence-and-discovery"],"media":[{"id":"5db638a14cb0ff87507b959836d2b668e0368d1950a4a97bdc231abcc8f2dbb2","kind":"article","url":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.08971","sourceUrl":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.08971","label":"Read original","provenance":"source_link","verification":{"status":"verified","checkedAt":"2026-11-12T13:33:16.081Z","method":"acquired_source","contentType":"text/html"},"recommendationReason":"Recommended by Jev for understanding this source; checked by Luna."}],"sourceMedia":{"status":"not_found","sourceUrl":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.08971","checkedAt":"2026-11-12T14:06:22.559Z","items":[],"note":"No suitable media was found by the supported page extraction."},"editorialDecision":{"outcome":"accept","reasonCodes":["material_development"],"rubricVersion":"stream-admission-v6","mediaId":"5db638a14cb0ff87507b959836d2b668e0368d1950a4a97bdc231abcc8f2dbb2","confidence":0.54,"provider":"typesafe","model":"jev-1.13.0","inputHash":"996f0569dc3b9daefb44607371423ff8dd16b39c22e87b0b815f1a18e5eacfec","decidedAt":"2026-11-12T13:33:19.246Z"},"provenance":{"textHash":"34629a5ae581a59cfb20e348dc4c57433f664822d557a8b2fcb168666675d4d5","observationId":"39046139d2e0f70b7e3dd8f427339e15cb27d31129da342f353fe292464a9b48","retrievedAt":"2026-11-12T13:33:15.630Z","kind":"publisher-page","preparer":{"model":"gpt-6-luna","runId":"0821ad3e-95b7-446b-8438-cb37924fa7c4"},"reviewer":{"model":"gpt-6-luna","runId":"a3359c3a-113e-49bd-88aa-0e76fce25aa9"}},"audit":{"status":"uncertain","reviewedAt":"2026-11-12T13:34:35.041Z","model":"anthropic/claude-opus-5.5"},"sourceAttribution":{"authors":[{"name":"Sheshanarayana, Disha","url":null,"kind":"unknown"},{"name":"Pal, Rajat Subhra","url":null,"kind":"unknown"},{"name":"Sinha, Manjira","url":null,"kind":"unknown"},{"name":"Dasgupta, Tirthankar","url":null,"kind":"unknown"}],"authorRole":"article-author","hosts":[],"status":"stated","authorRoster":{"truncated":false,"omitted":0,"assertionGroupsOmitted":0},"participation":[{"actor":{"name":"Sheshanarayana, Disha","url":null,"kind":"unknown","actorId":null},"role":"author","scope":{"kind":"work-credit","locator":null},"literalCredit":"Sheshanarayana, Disha","status":"stated","provenance":{"basis":"head-meta","sourceUrl":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.08971","locator":"head/meta[name=author|citation_author]"},"assertionId":"7b0ce9de108021711ae098fdd0cb07601bee22577c11c3c8eb152ca27409309d:participation:0","identity":{"version":"entity-identity-v1","status":"unresolved","actorId":null,"canonicalActorId":null,"candidateActorIds":[],"assertions":[],"sourceObservedAt":"2026-11-12T14:06:22.559Z","knowledgeAsOf":null},"sourceVersion":{"snapshotId":"7b0ce9de108021711ae098fdd0cb07601bee22577c11c3c8eb152ca27409309d","sourceUrl":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.08971","contentSha256":"88413e2c0d8b18b40b85d17c6063f459ce83d1e5746c997c0deeeb96cb69f9a9","textHash":"34629a5ae581a59cfb20e348dc4c57433f664822d557a8b2fcb168666675d4d5","observedAt":"2026-11-12T14:06:22.559Z"}},{"actor":{"name":"Pal, Rajat Subhra","url":null,"kind":"unknown","actorId":null},"role":"author","scope":{"kind":"work-credit","locator":null},"literalCredit":"Pal, Rajat Subhra","status":"stated","provenance":{"basis":"head-meta","sourceUrl":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.08971","locator":"head/meta[name=author|citation_author]"},"assertionId":"7b0ce9de108021711ae098fdd0cb07601bee22577c11c3c8eb152ca27409309d:participation:1","identity":{"version":"entity-identity-v1","status":"unresolved","actorId":null,"canonicalActorId":null,"candidateActorIds":[],"assertions":[],"sourceObservedAt":"2026-11-12T14:06:22.559Z","knowledgeAsOf":null},"sourceVersion":{"snapshotId":"7b0ce9de108021711ae098fdd0cb07601bee22577c11c3c8eb152ca27409309d","sourceUrl":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.08971","contentSha256":"88413e2c0d8b18b40b85d17c6063f459ce83d1e5746c997c0deeeb96cb69f9a9","textHash":"34629a5ae581a59cfb20e348dc4c57433f664822d557a8b2fcb168666675d4d5","observedAt":"2026-11-12T14:06:22.559Z"}},{"actor":{"name":"Sinha, Manjira","url":null,"kind":"unknown","actorId":null},"role":"author","scope":{"kind":"work-credit","locator":null},"literalCredit":"Sinha, Manjira","status":"stated","provenance":{"basis":"head-meta","sourceUrl":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.08971","locator":"head/meta[name=author|citation_author]"},"assertionId":"7b0ce9de108021711ae098fdd0cb07601bee22577c11c3c8eb152ca27409309d:participation:2","identity":{"version":"entity-identity-v1","status":"unresolved","actorId":null,"canonicalActorId":null,"candidateActorIds":[],"assertions":[],"sourceObservedAt":"2026-11-12T14:06:22.559Z","knowledgeAsOf":null},"sourceVersion":{"snapshotId":"7b0ce9de108021711ae098fdd0cb07601bee22577c11c3c8eb152ca27409309d","sourceUrl":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.08971","contentSha256":"88413e2c0d8b18b40b85d17c6063f459ce83d1e5746c997c0deeeb96cb69f9a9","textHash":"34629a5ae581a59cfb20e348dc4c57433f664822d557a8b2fcb168666675d4d5","observedAt":"2026-11-12T14:06:22.559Z"}},{"actor":{"name":"Dasgupta, Tirthankar","url":null,"kind":"unknown","actorId":null},"role":"author","scope":{"kind":"work-credit","locator":null},"literalCredit":"Dasgupta, Tirthankar","status":"stated","provenance":{"basis":"head-meta","sourceUrl":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.08971","locator":"head/meta[name=author|citation_author]"},"assertionId":"7b0ce9de108021711ae098fdd0cb07601bee22577c11c3c8eb152ca27409309d:participation:3","identity":{"version":"entity-identity-v1","status":"unresolved","actorId":null,"canonicalActorId":null,"candidateActorIds":[],"assertions":[],"sourceObservedAt":"2026-11-12T14:06:22.559Z","knowledgeAsOf":null},"sourceVersion":{"snapshotId":"7b0ce9de108021711ae098fdd0cb07601bee22577c11c3c8eb152ca27409309d","sourceUrl":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.08971","contentSha256":"88413e2c0d8b18b40b85d17c6063f459ce83d1e5746c997c0deeeb96cb69f9a9","textHash":"34629a5ae581a59cfb20e348dc4c57433f664822d557a8b2fcb168666675d4d5","observedAt":"2026-11-12T14:06:22.559Z"}}],"participationCoverage":{"total":4,"returned":4,"complete":true,"fullAssertions":"source-metadata-endpoint"},"distribution":null,"publisher":null,"sourceUrl":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.08971","snapshotId":"7b0ce9de108021711ae098fdd0cb07601bee22577c11c3c8eb152ca27409309d","contentSha256":"88413e2c0d8b18b40b85d17c6063f459ce83d1e5746c997c0deeeb96cb69f9a9","textHash":"34629a5ae581a59cfb20e348dc4c57433f664822d557a8b2fcb168666675d4d5","observedAt":"2026-11-12T14:06:22.559Z","basis":"publisher-page-metadata","sourceLinks":44,"linksTruncated":false,"metadataUrl":"/api/pipeline/stream/0f43fbad9cd9274d7bf16e8aee8ea6c1c6ecc6bdb5d7ee2a65c04d57969983aa/source"}}}],"audits":[{"publicationId":"9892e5e1-6405-4fab-8164-1a1b21b81f4c","verdict":"uncertain","findings":[{"dimension":"attribution","status":"pass","explanation":"The four named authors match the source listing. The definition, findings and argument are attributed to them with phrasing such as 'the authors report' and 'the authors argue.' The 'arXiv cs.AI' title prefix follows the publisher metadata, although the paper's primary category is cs.MA. This is not a material misattribution.","excerpt":"Authors:Disha Sheshanarayana, Rajat Subhra Pal, Manjira Sinha, Tirthankar Dasgupta"},{"dimension":"summary","status":"uncertain","explanation":"The reading faithfully states the definition, benchmark, results, repair and the authors' argument. A non-specialist would still lack two things. First, the context that multi-agent LLM systems increasingly combine judgments from several model instances, which is why the finding matters. Second, explanations of 'gold label' (the known correct answer) and 'collective rationality failures.' Smallest repair: open with the abstract's framing sentence, and add term-library tooltips for gold label, collective rationality failure and closed-/open-weight models. The question is substantive and non-leading.","excerpt":"Multi-agent LLM systems increasingly aggregate judgments across model instances, but reasoning about other agents can itself introduce failure."},{"dimension":"date","status":"pass","explanation":"originalPublished 2026-11-06 matches the v1 submission date. It is not the later feed date of 2026-11-09.","excerpt":"[Submitted on 6 Nov 2026]"},{"dimension":"support","status":"pass","explanation":"All six claims are verbatim-supported by the abstract, including the 47.8-point and 47.3% figures, the scope limited to the most susceptible setting, and the variable recovery. 'Sometimes turned' fairly renders the source's 'can turn.' The limitations and the closing caveat about deployed systems are framed as gaps, not as invented claims. The reading implies no unsupported benefits or costs.","excerpt":"Public accuracy drops by as much as 47.8 percentage points, and collective rationality failures reach 47.3% in the most susceptible setting."},{"dimension":"media","status":"pass","explanation":"The selected media is the verified direct arXiv abstract page for this paper, which is the most direct access to the source.","excerpt":null}],"createdAt":"2026-11-12T13:34:35.041Z","model":"anthropic/claude-opus-5.5"}],"correctionUrl":"https://escapemeridian.com/corrections/"}