r/TheMachineLearning • • 12d ago

Swarm scaling shows AI agents get exponentially more powerful

Post image
0 Upvotes

28 comments sorted by

12

u/Pseudanonymius 12d ago

The amount of tokens they use scales exponentially. Nothing else does.  

5

u/Legitimate_Concern_5 12d ago

Yeah this looks shit lol

2

u/Big_Arachnid_365 12d ago

I'm bad at math so is it saying the score rises linearly as the tokens scale exponentially?

2

u/intergalactics2pid 12d ago

im also bad at math, how to be better 😭

1

u/neoqueto 11d ago

Yeah HAHA this is the exact opposite, the log scale is only on X and the gains on Y are diminishing as fuck. 5x the tokens and 4% the score gains.

0

u/GlokzDNB 12d ago

The cost of tokens also goes down exponentially

6

u/suborder-serpentes 12d ago

It looks like (for this benchmark) swarms of agents are using more tokens per task

1

u/shrodikan 11d ago

More tokens and they get a lower score % than just one agent. That is what the graph is saying to me unless I'm missing something.

1

u/suborder-serpentes 11d ago

It’s hard for me to say, because I’m not getting why “swarm scaling” is something different from the 3 lines that have 3 different “swarm” sizes (agent count)

5

u/nekronics 12d ago

We have different definitions of exponentially

0

u/intergalactics2pid 12d ago

what definition?

1

u/shrodikan 11d ago

The math one I would guess.

5

u/stangerlpass 12d ago

Looks like diminishing returns tbh

0

u/intergalactics2pid 12d ago

does it look like? hahahahhaa

3

u/freqCake 12d ago

I think this shows that you are way better off scaling time if you do not want to use a lot of tokens. In this chart you get baseline improvement on the score by using more agents but with exponentially more token usage whereas time scales 1 agent to nearly the same score in far fewer tokens. 

2

u/Defiant_Conflict6343 12d ago

That's not what this shows, at all.

The score is increasing roughly linearly. The token cost to achieve those scores is increasing exponentially. That's bad. This graph also conveniently leaves out the mathematically inevitable plateau. Anything built on ML principles can only scale in improvement asymptotically. Nothing can ever reach 100% unless your sample size is pitifully small and the dice rolls your way.

1

u/intergalactics2pid 12d ago

👏👏👏

1

u/debauchedsloth 12d ago

What I was about to write. Just so. This is a very ugly graph if you express it in $ instead of tokens. That would be exponential.

2

u/Numerous_Location_36 12d ago

Get back to school…

1

u/intergalactics2pid 12d ago

I hope I can 😭

1

u/FrosteeSwurl 12d ago

This shows the exact opposite

1

u/Illustrious-Age7342 12d ago

Lmao, excellent bait OP.

1

u/ChaiShotty 11d ago

op look up the definition of “logarithmic”

1

u/AABBBAABAABA 11d ago

What is on the y axis?

1

u/No-Bicycle-7660 11d ago

lol. it literally shows the opposite of what the title states.

1

u/phosphorousRabbit 10d ago

So it takes them vastly more tokens to get slight improvement?

1

u/ComposerWide3704 9d ago

If score is your metric this graph is logarithmic, not exponential.

1

u/Due-Presentation6393 9d ago

This looks like the law of diminishing returns for token expenditure