Towards a Science of Scaling Agent Systems

Catalog evidence and recorded chart appearances. Inclusion is not an endorsement.

Source snapshot imported 2026-10-20. This is not a live feed. Source and contributions.

Evidence and limits

Finding: Multi-agent systems helped parallelizable work but degraded sequential planning by 39% to 70%. Independent agents amplified errors more than centralized systems, and tool density increased coordination cost.

Impact: Strengthen task-decomposability and error-containment checks. Reject agent count as a quality proxy.

Boundary: Benchmark architectures and tasks do not prove the same effects in governed repository work. Next: can a bounded owning-system test predict when centralized delegation beats one agent?

Flags: benchmark transfer; configuration selection; judge dependence

Record State: Catalog review recorded; not a performance endorsement

What was reviewed: Structure and relevance screened; not a full evaluation

Inspect original source

Recorded chart appearances

  • 2026-10-13: position 96. Relevant to the recorded review topic (see source); Structure and relevance screened; not a full evaluation evidence
  • 2026-10-12: position 95. Relevant to the recorded review topic (see source); Structure and relevance screened; not a full evaluation evidence