Lyfe Agents: Generative agents for low-cost real-time social interactions
Open accessAbstract
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.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Zhao et al. (2023) utilizes LLM-based Agents to simulate a virtual town with restaurant and customer agents, yielding insights aligned with sociological and economic theories.
“[Zhao et al., 2023] utilizes LLM-based Agents to simulate a virtual town with restaurant and customer agents, yielding insights aligned with sociological and economic theories.”
From Large Language Model based Multi-Agents: A Survey of Progress and Challenges (2024) · cites this paper as Zhao et al., 2023
Section 3 describes an LLM-agent simulation in a virtual town, and the character descriptions include a restaurant owner and a customer. But the experiments in Section 4 concern a murder mystery, a school activity fair, and helping a patient—not a simulation centered on restaurant and customer agents. The cited passages do not report findings aligned with sociological and economic theories. (LLM, conf=0.87)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe use of LLMs in simulating social dynamics is a rapidly growing research area, showcasing promising results in terms of human-like interactions.
“The use of LLMs in simulating social dynamics is a rapidly growing research area , showcasing promising results in terms of human-like interactions (Park et al., 2023, 2022; Kaiya et al., 2023; Törnberg et al., 2023; Li et al., 2023a; Zhou et al., 2023b; Mou et al., 2024; Liu et al., 2024).”
From Simulating Opinion Dynamics with Networks of LLM-based Agents (2024) · cites this paper as Kaiya et al., 2023
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
Cited by 2
Research works printed but not linked: 7
- Gordon DA Brown and Stephan Lewandowsky. Forgetting in memory models: Arguments against trace decay and consolidation failure. Forgetting, pp. 49-75, 2010.
- Nelson Cowan. The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity. Behavioral and brain sciences, 24(1):87-114, 2001.
- Stanislas Dehaene, Hakwan Lau, and Sid Kouider. What is consciousness, and could machines have it? Robotics, AI, and Humanity: Science, Ethics, and Policy, pp. 43-56, 2021.
- Ann M Graybiel. The basal ganglia and chunking of action repertoires. Neurobiology of learning and memory, 70(1-2):119-136, 1998.
- Falk Lieder and Thomas L. Griffiths. Resource-rationality and dynamic coupling of brains and social environments. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 43, 2019. URL https://api. semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:73441334.
- George A Miller. The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological review, 63(2):81, 1956.
- J Terry, Benjamin Black, Nathaniel Grammel, Mario Jayakumar, Ananth Hari, Ryan Sullivan, Luis S Santos, Clemens Dieffendahl, Caroline Horsch, Rodrigo Perez-Vicente, et al. Pettingzoo: Gym for multi-agent reinforcement learning. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 34: 15032-15043, 2021.
- Authors
- Kaiya, Z., Naim, M., Kondic, J., Cortes, M., Ge, J., Luo, S., Yang, G. R., & Ahn, A.
- Affiliations
- Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US)
- Peking University (CN)
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2023
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2310.02172
- OpenAlex
- W4387356325
- Cited by
- 2
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 1
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Artificial Intelligence in Games
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Multi-Agent Systems and Negotiation
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Psychiatry, Mental Health, Neuroscience
- Keywords
- generative AI agents, large language models, human-agent interaction, memory efficiency, multi-agent systems, virtual worlds, social reasoning, self-motivation
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
