Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Beyond the Sum: Unlocking AI Agents Potential Through Market Forces

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read The paper argues that LLM-based agents can become autonomous economic actors once digital infrastructure stops assuming a human at every layer.

desk verdict A clear, well-organized vision essay on infrastructure for AI agents in markets, but its central claim is asserted, not evidenced, and the reliability premise is unexamined. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.10388 v2 pith:XKTJ5VIY submitted 2024-12-19 cs.CY cs.AIcs.CLcs.GTcs.MA

Jordi Montes Sanabria , Pol Alvarez Vecino This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CYcs.AIcs.CLcs.GTcs.MA
keywords AIagentsDigitalInfrastructureEconomicSystemsEmergentIntelligenceMarketDynamicscodegenerationmachinepayments
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper argues that large language model-based agents now have the theoretical ability to act as independent economic participants—discovering services, writing code to use them, and transacting at machine speed—but that the digital infrastructure built for human users blocks them at every step. It identifies four infrastructure domains as the decisive barriers: identity and authorization, service discovery, software interfaces, and payments. The authors claim that removing these barriers is not merely a technical convenience but a necessary step toward new forms of economic organization, in which markets of agents coordinate activity much as human markets do, only continuously and at machine speed. A sympathetic reader would care because the argument reframes AI progress: the bottleneck to economic-scale AI may be institutional infrastructure rather than model capability alone.

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by a four-part infrastructure taxonomy: identity and authorization, service discovery, software interfaces, and payment systems. Each pillar is examined in three stages—current infrastructure, limitations for AI agents, and future design considerations—and together they frame infrastructure, not agent capability, as the binding constraint. The paper also grounds the agent side in a perception-reasoning-action framework, the standard decomposition of an LLM-based agent into a reasoning core, perception components, and action components, with code generation as the bridge that turns understanding into economic action. It points to mechanisms such as the L402 protocol, which extends the HTTP 402 status code into a protocol for payment-gated API access, as a concrete model of what machine-friendly infrastructure could look like.

What would settle it

A field experiment in which agents are given machine-readable service registries, cryptographic attestation, and an L402-style payment rail, then asked to perform a real multi-step commercial task such as launching and selling a paid API endpoint, would settle the claim. If task completion remains low because agents generate faulty code or make unsafe financial decisions, the binding barrier is agent reliability rather than infrastructure; if the same agents succeed with the new infrastructure but fail without it, the paper's thesis is supported.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that AI agents, powered by large language models, possess the capabilities to be economic actors—they can perceive, reason, and act through dynamically generated and executed code—yet contemporary digital infrastructure, architected for human-scale interaction, systematically impedes their participation. The authors examine four infrastructure areas and show how each embeds human-centric assumptions: service discovery relies on conferences, marketing, and human-optimized content; identity systems assume stable, physical, human identities; interfaces force agents into either human user interfaces or restrictive APIs; payment systems require identity documents, anti-bot puzzles, human-scale rate limits, and fee structures that are actively hostile to automated actors. The conclusion is that addressing these infrastructure challenges is a fundamental step toward enabling markets that combine AI agents, producing economic efficiency through continuous operation, perfect replication, and distributed learning.

Load-bearing premise

The paper assumes, without empirical support, that LLM-based agents can reliably execute complex economic actions end-to-end—writing correct code, handling errors, and respecting payment and legal constraints—once infrastructure barriers are removed.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Replacing human-oriented service discovery with machine-readable registries and semantic descriptions would let agents find and evaluate services without browsing landing pages or attending conferences.
  • Cryptographic self-issued identities and capability-based delegation would allow agents to be created, spawned, and destroyed at machine speed while preserving audit trails and proof of delegation.
  • Protocols like L402 would make micropayments economically viable, changing the fixed-fee structure that currently rules out high-frequency machine-to-machine transactions.
  • Adaptive interfaces that deliver structured responses to agents and visual responses to humans would remove the forced choice between UI automation and rigid pre-defined APIs.
  • If these infrastructure pieces come together, agent markets could coordinate economic activity continuously, with strategies replicated perfectly and learning shared across instances, rather than being throttled by human operating rhythms.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A direct test of the infrastructure-first thesis would be a controlled trial: give one group of agents machine-readable discovery, attestation-based identity, and a micropayment rail, and compare autonomous task completion against a control group on today's infrastructure.
  • The four barriers are probably not equal in weight; payment and identity systems are regulated and deliberately anti-automation, so they are likely to bind first even if discovery and interface standards are solved.
  • If the thesis is right, the sequencing of AI governance is partly backwards: safety mechanisms for economic agents will matter most after payment access opens, because only then do the risks become real and the failure modes observable.
  • The market analogy also implies new failure modes the paper does not analyze—herding, collusion, or flash-crash dynamics among perfectly replicating agents—so the efficiency gains it promises would need new circuit breakers to remain credible.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. This position paper argues that LLM-based AI agents could become independent economic actors in digital markets, but that current digital infrastructure, designed for human interaction, blocks them. The paper examines four infrastructure areas—service discovery, identity and authorization, software interfaces, and payments—and argues that each embeds human-centric assumptions (CAPTCHAs, KYC, human-readable UIs, anti-bot measures) that impede machine participation. It sketches future directions such as machine-readable service registries, cryptographic and attestation-based identity, adaptive interfaces, and protocol-level payment standards. The paper is conceptual: it contains no experiments, no formal model, and no systematic empirical evaluation. Its central claim is that the identified infrastructure challenges are key barriers to realizing AI agents' potential as market participants.

Significance. If accepted, the framework would be useful as a research agenda and as a way of organizing work on agent-compatible infrastructure. The paper is clearly written and its four-part taxonomy is intuitive; it does a service by collecting concrete frictions such as CAPTCHA systems, KYC/AML requirements, rate limits, and anti-bot fraud detection. However, the central claim is not established. The paper provides no empirical evidence that removing the four barriers would enable reliable autonomous market participation, nor does it compare infrastructure barriers against capability, legal, or trust barriers. It is best read as an informed opinion piece rather than a completed result. The paper's evidentiary base is further weakened by citation errors and by an undisclosed favorable reference to a protocol associated with the authors' company.

major comments (3)
  1. [§2, §10] The central claim in the abstract and conclusion — that the four infrastructure barriers are the key blockers to AI agents acting as independent economic participants — rests on an unstated premise that modern LLM-based agents can already execute the entire economic action loop reliably. Section 2 explicitly concedes that these capabilities 'remain largely confined to specific tasks and bounded contexts' and that goals, constraints, and success criteria 'still come from human developers rather than emerging from the system's own objectives.' The paper then asserts, without evidence, that 'the shift toward true code agency' will occur. The examples cited (Voyager, Replit Agent) are from game or coding-assistant settings with forgiving failure modes; Section 8.2 notes that payment processors deliberately use anti-automation measures and flag agent-like patterns as fraud, so economic actions are not forgiving. Because payments are irreversible and contracts are binding, the paper must either supply empirical evidence that agents can reliably discover, authenticate, pay, integrate, and recover from errors end-to-end, or it must explicitly reframe the conclusion as conditional on future capability. As written, Section 10's statement that 'We have the core AI capabilities needed for market participation' is an assertion, not a result.
  2. [§4, abstract] The paper overstates what its analysis shows about the four infrastructure areas. The Sam scenario in Section 4 demonstrates frictions, but it does not establish that the named areas are the principal barriers to agent market participation. KYC/AML regulation, legal liability, dispute resolution, safety, and human oversight are mentioned in Sections 8.2 and 10 but are not infrastructure in the §4 sense, and the paper does not argue why the four chosen areas are more important than these or than agent capability itself. The abstract's phrase 'key barriers' is therefore stronger than the evidence supports. The authors should either narrow the claim to 'one important class of barriers' or provide an explicit comparative argument for the primacy of infrastructure.
  3. [References [12], [27], [28], [49]] The reference list contains demonstrable errors that undermine the paper's evidentiary base. Reference [12] attributes 'Mastering the game of Go with deep neural networks and tree search' to Christopher Clark and Amos Storkey; the cited paper is by Silver et al. References [27] and [28] are duplicate entries for the same scaling-laws paper. Reference [49] contains a malformed URL ('https:%arxiv.org/abs/2305.16291' appears as 'https:%arxiv.org/abs/2305.16291' in the text) and an incomplete sentence about '30' that appears to be a corrupted comparison. Because this is a non-empirical paper whose arguments rely on cited prior work, these errors should be systematically corrected before publication.
minor comments (4)
  1. [§3] The bullet point 'Perfect Replication' is an overstatement for stochastic LLM-based agents; 'near-perfect replication' would be accurate and sufficient for the argument.
  2. [§8.3] The favorable description of the L402 protocol is presented as an example of machine-friendly payments without disclosure that L402 is associated with the authors' affiliation (Fewsats); the authors should disclose this competing interest or compare L402 with alternative approaches.
  3. [§4] The sentence 'Even when he needed programmatic access to services, he first had to work through human touchpoints' appears twice almost verbatim; one instance should be removed.
  4. [§1] The sentence 'This perception-reasoning-action framework is specially useful' is incomplete and should be completed or merged with the following paragraph.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: this is a qualitative position paper that makes no derived predictions, so there is no reduction of outputs to inputs.

full rationale

The paper is a vision/position essay rather than a derivation. It contains no equations, no fitted parameters, no benchmark that is predicted, and no uniqueness theorem invoked to force a choice. The four infrastructure areas (identity, discovery, interfaces, payments) are analyzed qualitatively by comparing current human-centric infrastructure with a described future of autonomous agents; the conclusion that these areas are 'key barriers' is an argued judgment, not a quantity computed from inputs. The closest candidate to a definitional reduction is Section 3's definition of a market participant as 'any entity that can process information, make decisions, and act based on economic principles,' which is then applied to AI agents. That is an over-broad premise and a correctness risk, not a circular derivation: the paper does not define AI agents as participants by construction, and the definition's criteria (especially 'act based on economic principles') are asserted rather than derived. The favorable mention of the L402 protocol in Section 8.3 is illustrative and not load-bearing; even if the authors were affiliated with it, no argument or result depends on L402's adoption. Acknowledgments also mention LLM feedback through persona prompts, but that is an authorship disclosure, not a load-bearing citation. No self-citation chain, fitted-input-called-prediction pattern, or renaming of a known result as a new contribution is present.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central argument rests on assumptions about agent reliability, market efficiency, and the sufficiency of the four selected infrastructure areas. None of these are derived or empirically established in the paper; they are accepted as premises. No free parameters or invented entities appear because the paper is non-quantitative.

assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption LLM-based agents can reliably perform autonomous economic actions without human supervision.
    Section 2 asserts that agents can write, execute, and adapt code to achieve their own objectives; this capability is the foundation for the paper's market vision, but the paper offers no empirical evidence for reliability at scale.
  • domain assumption Markets are an efficient coordination mechanism and will remain so when AI agents participate.
    Section 3 relies on Hayek's account of market coordination and assumes extending it to machine-speed agents preserves or improves efficiency; this is a normative economic assumption, not demonstrated.
  • ad hoc to paper The four identified infrastructure areas (identity, discovery, interfaces, payments) are the primary barriers and their remediation is necessary and sufficient for agent market participation.
    Section 4 frames the paper's scope; it selects these four areas without a systematic derivation that other barriers (e.g., legal liability, safety, trust) are secondary.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Beyond the Sum: Unlocking AI Agents Potential Through Market Forces." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/XKTJ5VIY

@misc{pith2026250110388,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Beyond the Sum: Unlocking AI Agents Potential Through Market Forces},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/XKTJ5VIY}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.10388}
}
read the original abstract

The emergence of Large Language Models has fundamentally transformed the capabilities of AI agents, enabling a new class of autonomous agents capable of interacting with their environment through dynamic code generation and execution. These agents possess the theoretical capacity to operate as independent economic actors within digital markets, offering unprecedented potential for value creation through their distinct advantages in operational continuity, perfect replication, and distributed learning capabilities. However, contemporary digital infrastructure, architected primarily for human interaction, presents significant barriers to their participation. This work presents a systematic analysis of the infrastructure requirements necessary for AI agents to function as autonomous participants in digital markets. We examine four key areas - identity and authorization, service discovery, interfaces, and payment systems - to show how existing infrastructure actively impedes agent participation. We argue that addressing these infrastructure challenges represents more than a technical imperative; it constitutes a fundamental step toward enabling new forms of economic organization. Much as traditional markets enable human intelligence to coordinate complex activities beyond individual capability, markets incorporating AI agents could dramatically enhance economic efficiency through continuous operation, perfect information sharing, and rapid adaptation to changing conditions. The infrastructure challenges identified in this work represent key barriers to realizing this potential.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.10388 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Service discovery components and challenges. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Identity infrastructure components and challeng [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Authorization infrastructure components and cha [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Software interface components and challenges. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Payment infrastructure components and challenge [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Intelligent System of Emergent Knowledge: A Coordination Fabric for Billions of Minds

    cs.MA 2025-06 reject novelty 2.0 of 10

    ISEK is a conceptual blockchain-and-token architecture for coordinating human and AI agents, with no implementation, experiments, or formal results reported.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

53 extracted references · 38 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [12]

    mastering the gam e of go with deep neural networks and tree search

    Christopher Clark and Amos Storkey. "mastering the gam e of go with deep neural networks and tree search"

    work page

  2. [28]

    Brow n, Benjamin Chess, Rewon Child, Scott Gray, Alec Radford, Jeffrey Wu, and Dario Amodei

    Jared Kaplan, Sam McCandlish, Tom Henighan, Tom B. Brow n, Benjamin Chess, Rewon Child, Scott Gray, Alec Radford, Jeffrey Wu, and Dario Amodei. Scaling laws for neural language models. 2020. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2001.08361

    arXiv 2020

  3. [49]

    Gho st in the minecraft: Generally capable agents for open-world environments via large language models with text-based knowledge and memory, 2023

    Xizhou Zhu, Y untao Chen, Hao Tian, Chenxin Tao, Weijie S u, Chenyu Y ang, Gao Huang, Bin Li, Lewei Lu, Xiaogang Wang, Y u Qiao, Zhaoxiang Zhang, and Jifeng Dai. Gho st in the minecraft: Generally capable agents for open-world environments via large language models with text-based knowledge and memory, 2023. Shows how LLM-based agents overcome limitations...

    work page 2023

  4. [1]

    To react or not to react: End-to-end visual pose forecasting for personalized avata r during dyadic conversations

    Chaitanya Ahuja, Shugao Ma, Louis-Philippe Morency, an d Y aser Sheikh. To react or not to react: End-to-end visual pose forecasting for personalized avata r during dyadic conversations. 2019. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/1910.02181v1

    arXiv 2019

  5. [2]

    Brian Arthur

    W . Brian Arthur. The Nature of T echnology: What It Is and How It Evolves . Free Press, New Y ork, USA, 2009

    work page 2009

  6. [3]

    multimodal machine learning: A survey and taxonomy

    Tadas Baltrušaitis, Chaitanya Ahuja, and Louis-Philip pe Morency. "multimodal machine learning: A survey and taxonomy". 2017. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/1705.09406v2

    arXiv 2017

  7. [4]

    Bengio and P

    Y . Bengio and P . Frasconi. Diffusion of context and credi t information in markovian models. 1995. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/9510101v1

    work page arXiv 1995

  8. [5]

    Bergstra, D

    J. Bergstra, D. Y amins, and D. D. Cox. Making a science of m odel search. 2012. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/1209.5111v1

    arXiv 2012

Show all 53 references
  1. [6]

    Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies

    Nick Bostrom. Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, 2014

    2014

  2. [7]

    Botvinick, D

    M. Botvinick, D. G. T. Barrett, P . Battaglia, N. de Freita s, D. Kumaran, J. Z Leibo, T. Lillicrap, J. Modayil, S. Mohamed, N. C. Rabinowitz, D. J. Rezende, A. Santoro, T. Sc haul, C. Summerfield, G. Wayne, T. Weber, D. Wierstra, S. Legg, and D. Hassabis. Building machines tha...

    2017 arXiv

  3. [8]

    Tom B. Brown, Benjamin Mann, Nick Ryder, Melanie Subbiah , Jared Kaplan, Prafulla Dhariwal, Arvind Neelakantan, Pranav Shyam, Girish Sastry, Amanda Askell, S andhini Agarwal, Ariel Herbert-V oss, Gretchen Krueger, Tom Henighan, Rewon Child, Aditya Ramesh, Daniel M. Ziegler, Je...

    2020 arXiv

  4. [9]

    Race against the machine: How the digital revolution is acce lerating innovation, driving productivity, and irreversibly trans forming employment and the economy

    Erik Brynjolfsson and Andrew McAfee. Race against the machine: How the digital revolution is acce lerating innovation, driving productivity, and irreversibly trans forming employment and the economy . Brynjolfsson and McAfee, 2011

    2011

  5. [10]

    The Second Machine Age: W ork, Progress, and Prosperity in a Time of Brilliant T echnologies

    Erik Brynjolfsson and Andrew McAfee. The Second Machine Age: W ork, Progress, and Prosperity in a Time of Brilliant T echnologies. W . W . Norton & Company, 2014

    2014

  6. [11]

    The laws of identity

    Kim Cameron. The laws of identity. Microsoft Corp, 12:8–11, 2005

    2005

  7. [13]

    Tool loop – claudette, 2024

    Claudette. Tool loop – claudette, 2024. URL https://claudette.answer.ai/toolloop.html. Accessed: 2024-06-17

    2024

  8. [14]

    Windsurf: Codeium’s AI-Powered Code Generat ion, 2024

    Codeium. Windsurf: Codeium’s AI-Powered Code Generat ion, 2024. URL https://codeium.com/windsurf. Accessed: 2024-06-17

    2024

  9. [15]

    Cursor: The AI-Powered Code Editor, 2024

    Cursor AI. Cursor: The AI-Powered Code Editor, 2024. UR L https://www.cursor.com/. Accessed: 2024- 06-17

    2024

  10. [16]

    Human-computer interaction, volume 1

    Alan Dix. Human-computer interaction, volume 1. Pearson Education, 2004

    2004

  11. [17]

    The sybil attack

    John R Douceur. The sybil attack. In International workshop on peer-to-peer systems , pages 251–260. Springer, 2002

    2002

  12. [18]

    Survey: The ai wave continues to grow on softwar e development teams - the github blog, 2024

    GitHub. Survey: The ai wave continues to grow on softwar e development teams - the github blog, 2024. URL https://github.blog/news-insights/research/survey-a i-wave-grows/. Accessed: 2024-06-17

    2024

  13. [19]

    GitHub Copilot: Y our AI Pair Programmer, 2 024

    GitHub, Inc. GitHub Copilot: Y our AI Pair Programmer, 2 024. URL https://github.com/features/copilot. Accessed: 2024-06-17

    2024

  14. [20]

    Ian J. Goodfellow, Dumitru Erhan, Pierre Luc Carrier, A aron Courville, Mehdi Mirza, Ben Hamner, Will Cukier- ski, Yichuan Tang, David Thaler, Dong-Hyun Lee, Yingbo Zhou , Chetan Ramaiah, Fangxiang Feng, Ruifan Li, Xiaojie Wang, Dimitris Athanasakis, John Shawe-Taylor , Maxim ...

    2013 arXiv

  15. [21]

    Digital infrastructure

    Shane Greenstein. Digital infrastructure. Economics of infrastructure investment () University of Ch icago Press, 2019

    2019

  16. [22]

    The future of payment systems

    Andrew G Haldane, Stephen Millard, and Victoria Saport a. The future of payment systems . Routledge, 2008

    2008

  17. [23]

    F. A. Hayek. The use of knowledge in society. The American Economic Review , 35(4):519–530, 1945

    1945

  18. [24]

    playing to learn: A study of minecraft

    Anssi Kanervisto, Janne Karttunen, and Ville Hautamäk i. "playing to learn: A study of minecraft". 2020. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2005.03374v1

    2020 arXiv

  19. [25]

    General characterization of agents by states they visit

    Anssi Kanervisto, Tomi Kinnunen, and Ville Hautamäki. General characterization of agents by states they visit

  20. [26]

    Action space shaping in deep reinforcement learning

    Anssi Kanervisto, Christian Scheller, and Ville Hauta mäki. Action space shaping in deep reinforcement learning

  21. [29]

    URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2004.00980v2

    2004 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Multi- modal lecture presentations dataset: Understanding multi modality in educational slides

    Dong Won Lee, Chaitanya Ahuja, Paul Pu Liang, Sanika Nat u, and Louis-Philippe Morency. Multi- modal lecture presentations dataset: Understanding multi modality in educational slides. 2022. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2208.08080v1. 21 Beyond the Sum: Unlocking AI Agents Potentia...

    2022 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Automating code review activities by large-scale pre-training,

    Zhiyu Li, Shuai Lu, Daya Guo, Nan Duan, Shailesh Jannu, G rant Jenks, Deep Majumder, Jared Green, Alexey Svyatkovskiy, Shengyu Fu, and Neel Sundaresan. Automating code review activities by large-scale pre-training,

  24. [32]

    From video game to real robot: The transfer between action spaces

    Janne Karttunen, Anssi Kanervisto, Ville Kyrki, and Vi lle Hautamäki. From video game to real robot: The transfer between action spaces. 2019. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/1905.00741v2

    2019 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Handbook of collective intelligence

    Thomas W Malone and Michael S Bernstein. Handbook of collective intelligence . MIT press, 2022

    2022

  26. [34]

    Deep learning: A critical appraisal

    Gary Marcus. Deep learning: A critical appraisal. 2018 . URL https://arxiv.org/abs/1801.00631

    2018 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Cloud computing: theory and practice

    Dan C Marinescu. Cloud computing: theory and practice . Morgan Kaufmann, 2022

    2022

  28. [36]

    Advances in Financial Machine Learning

    Marcos Lopez de Prado. Advances in Financial Machine Learning . Wiley, 2018

    2018

  29. [37]

    playing atari with deep reinf orcement learning

    V olodymyr Mnih, Koray Kavukcuoglu, David Silver, Alex Graves, Ioannis Antonoglou, Daan Wier- stra, and Martin Riedmiller. "playing atari with deep reinf orcement learning". 2013. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/1312.5602v1

    2013 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Algorithmic game theory

    Noam Nisan, Tim Roughgarden, Eva Tardos, and Vijay V V azirani, editors. Algorithmic game theory. Cambridge University Press, 2007

    2007

  31. [39]

    A comprehensive review of data-driven co-speech gest ure generation

    Simbarashe Nyatsanga, Taras Kucherenko, Chaitanya Ah uja, Gustav Eje Henter, and Michael Neff. A comprehensive review of data-driven co-speech gest ure generation. 2023. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2301.05339v4

    2023 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Bedd: The minerl basalt evaluation and demonstration s dataset for training and benchmarking agents that solve fuzzy tasks

    Stephanie Milani, Anssi Kanervisto, Karolis Ramanaus kas, Sander Schulhoff, Brandon Houghton, and Rohin Shah. Bedd: The minerl basalt evaluation and demonstration s dataset for training and benchmarking agents that solve fuzzy tasks. 2023. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2312.02405v1

    2023 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Schelling

    Thomas C. Schelling. Micromotives and Macrobehavior. W . W . Norton & Company, New Y ork, USA, 1978

    1978

  34. [42]

    Schumpeter

    Joseph A. Schumpeter. Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy . Harper & Brothers, New Y ork, USA, 1942

    1942

  35. [43]

    mastering chess and shogi by self-play with a general reinforcement learning algorithm

    David Silver, Thomas Hubert, Julian Schrittwieser, Io annis Antonoglou, Matthew Lai, Arthur Guez, Marc Lanc- tot, Laurent Sifre, Dharshan Kumaran, Thore Graepel, Timot hy Lillicrap, Karen Simonyan, and Demis Hass- abis. "mastering chess and shogi by self-play with a general re...

    2017 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Replit agent | replit docs, 2024

    Replit. Replit agent | replit docs, 2024. URL https://docs.replit.com/replitai/agent. Accessed: 2024-06-17

    2024

  37. [45]

    An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the W ealth of Nations

    Adam Smith. An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the W ealth of Nations. W . Strahan and T. Cadell, London, UK, 1776

  38. [46]

    Gomez, Lukasz Kaiser, and Illia Polosukhin

    Ashish V aswani, Noam Shazeer, Niki Parmar, Jakob Uszko reit, Llion Jones, Aidan N. Gomez, Lukasz Kaiser, and Illia Polosukhin. Attention is all you need. 2017. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/1706.03762

    2017 arXiv

  39. [47]

    V oyager: An open-ended embodied agent with large language models, 2023

    Guanzhi Wang, Y uqi Xie, Y unfan Jiang, Ajay Mandlekar, C haowei Xiao, Y uke Zhu, Linxi Fan, and An- ima Anandkumar. V oyager: An open-ended embodied agent with large language models, 2023. URL https:%arxiv.org/abs/2305.16291

    2023 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Survey of different typ es of captcha

    V ed Prakash Singh and Preet Pal. Survey of different typ es of captcha. International Journal of Computer Science and Information T echnologies, 5(2):2242–2245, 2014

    2014

  41. [50]

    Ziegler, Nisan Stiennon, Jeffrey Wu, Tom B

    Daniel M. Ziegler, Nisan Stiennon, Jeffrey Wu, Tom B. Br own, Alec Radford, Dario Amodei, Paul Christiano, and Geoffrey Irving. Fine-tuning language mod els from human preferences. 2019. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/1909.08593v2. 22

    2019 arXiv

  42. [52]

    The rise and potential of large language model based agents: A survey, 2023

    Zhiheng Xi, Wenxiang Chen, Xin Guo, Wei He, Yiwen Ding, B oyang Hong, Ming Zhang, Junzhe Wang, Senjie Jin, Enyu Zhou, Rui Zheng, Xiaoran Fan, Xiao Wang, Limao Xion g, Y uhao Zhou, Weiran Wang, Changhao Jiang, Yicheng Zou, Xiangyang Liu, Zhangyue Yin, Shihan Dou , Rongxiang Wen...

    2023 arXiv

  43. [2014]

    URL https://arxiv.org/abs/1412.3409v2

    arXiv

  44. [2020]

    URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2012.01244v3

    2012 arXiv

  45. [2022]

    URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2203.09095

    arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.