PapersWithELO
← ICLR 2024 leaderboard

Lyfe Agents: generative agents for low-cost real-time social interactions

Kaiya Ivy Zhao, Michelangelo Naim, Jovana Kondic, Manuel Ernesto Cortes, Jiaxin Ge, Shuying Luo, Guangyu Robert Yang, Andrew Ahn

general MLGenerative AgentsLarge Language ModelsSimulate Social BehaviorVirtual SocietyAutonomyHuman-Like Interactions
4.10100
Fused
band ≈ ±14 pct pts (from σ = 0.28)
6.00100
Mimo
band ≈ ±20 pct pts (from σ = 0.40)
2.50100
DeepSeek
band ≈ ±20 pct pts (from σ = 0.41)

OpenReview ground truth

Rejected

Abstract

Highly autonomous generative agents powered by large language models promise to simulate intricate social behaviors in virtual societies. However, achieving real-time interactions with humans at a low computational cost remains challenging. Here, we introduce Lyfe Agents. They combine low-cost with real-time responsiveness, all while remaining intelligent and goal-oriented. Key innovations include: (1) an option-action framework, reducing the cost of high-level decisions; (2) asynchronous self-monitoring for better self-consistency; and (3) a Summarize-and-Forget memory mechanism, prioritizing critical memory items at a low cost. We evaluate Lyfe Agents' self-motivation and sociability across several multi-agent scenarios in our custom LyfeGame 3D virtual environment platform. When equipped with our brain-inspired techniques, Lyfe Agents can exhibit human-like self-motivated social reasoning. For example, the agents can solve a crime (a murder mystery) through autonomous collaboration and information exchange. Meanwhile, our techniques enabled Lyfe Agents to operate at a computational cost 10-100 times lower than existing alternatives. Our findings underscore the transformative potential of autonomous generative agents to enrich human social experiences in virtual worlds.

Author context

Most prolific author: 2 submissions (credibility 1.00).

No mass-submission penalty for this paper (authors within normal submission volume).

Aggregate statistics only — no individual author rankings.

Ranking trajectory

Percentile by tournament round — convergence indicates rating stability.

Judge assessments

Mean overall score 0.0 ± 0.0 (n = 36)