Hongcheng Guo
Publications
When Agents Evolve, Institutions Follow
Across millennia, complex societies have faced the same coordination problem of how to organize collective action among cognitively bounded and informationally incomplete individuals. Different civilizations developed different political institutions to answer the same basic questions of who proposes, who reviews, who executes, and how errors are corrected. We argue that multi-agent systems built on large language models face the same challenge. Their central problem is not only individual intelligence, but collective organization. Historical institutions therefore provide a structured design space for multi-agent architectures, making key trade-offs between efficiency and error correction, centralization and distribution, and specialization and redundancy empirically testable. We translate seven historical political institutions, spanning four canonical governance patterns, into executable multi-agent architectures and evaluate them under identical conditions across three large language models and two benchmarks. We find that governance topology strongly shapes collective performance. Within a single model, the gap between the best and worst institution exceeds 57 percentage points, while the optimal architecture shifts systematically with model capability and task characteristics. These results suggest that collective intelligence will not advance through a single optimal organizational form, but through governance mechanisms that can be reselected and reconfigured as tasks and capabilities evolve. More broadly, this points to a transition from \textbf{self-evolving agents} to the \textbf{self-evolving multi-agent system}. The code is available on \href{https://github.com/cf3i/SocialSystemArena}{GitHub}.
IRPM: Intergroup Relative Preference Modeling for Pointwise Generative Reward Models
Generative Reward Models (GRMs) have demonstrated strong performance in reward modeling, due to their interpretability and potential for refinement through reinforcement learning (RL). However, widely used pairwise GRMs create a computational bottleneck in reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF), when calibrating or aggregating preference signals over n candidates, often incurring O(n^2) pairwise judgments. To address this issue, we propose Intergroup Relative Preference Modeling (IRPM), an RL-based method that extends the Bradley--Terry preference-learning paradigm via intergroup comparisons to train pointwise GRMs from pairwise preference data. IRPM derives pointwise reward for each response by contrasting groups of chosen vs. rejected samples, enabling pointwise scores comparable across candidate sets and O(n) reward evaluation for a variable number of candidates during RL training, while preserving interpretability and scalability. Experiments show that IRPM achieves state-of-the-art performance among pointwise GRMs on RM-Bench, JudgeBench and RewardBench, and approaches the performance of leading pairwise GRMs. In addition, IRPM achieves substantial gains in post-training evaluations, demonstrating its effectiveness.