Finally. I've been saying that we need to stop focusing on a single agent getting everything right and instead layer agents for about 16 months now, but it's great to have a paper to point to.
If this was done at more granular steps of agent quantity I'm curious just how closely it would match those numbers.
I'd also really love to see the eventual follow-up where we see how much more performance can be obtained when the agents are each fine tuned towards slightly different aims. I'd expect there'd even be a performance lift from just having the agents each set at different temperature levels.
Very happy to see the research community starting to step in this direction!
It's interesting that the diminishing returns for tasks flatten out rapidly around the same size as the ideal human meeting sizes: https://www.researchgate.net/figure/18-Optimal-Meeting-Sizes...
If this was done at more granular steps of agent quantity I'm curious just how closely it would match those numbers.
I'd also really love to see the eventual follow-up where we see how much more performance can be obtained when the agents are each fine tuned towards slightly different aims. I'd expect there'd even be a performance lift from just having the agents each set at different temperature levels.
Very happy to see the research community starting to step in this direction!