Collective Counterfactual Planning: Coordination, Consent, and Verification under Representational Constraints
Chainarong Amornbunchornvej
Abstract
Groups routinely complete projects that no single member can plan, execute, or verify alone. We propose a formal model of this phenomenon, Collective Counterfactual Planning (CCP), in which the binding limitation on each agent is neither capability, knowledge, nor observability, but representational geometry: each agent perceives the state, conceives moves, consents to actions, and certifies goal requirements only through a projection onto an agent-specific subspace of a common task space. Four gates jointly determine whether a team can reach a conjunctive goal and legitimately recognize that it has done so: the exogenous implementation coalitions required to perform each action, together with three representational gates -- conception, consent, and task-relative verification qualification. We define the Collective Counterfactual Solvability (CCS) problem, separating geometric feasibility, executable attainment, and validated completion. The results expose a positive-negative duality. Iterated cross-agent relay can unlock a solution that no one-shot pooling of individual plans contains, but any goal requirement depending essentially on the subspace dark to the entire team is unverifiable and therefore not validly completable, even when the trajectory accidentally attains it. Memoryless and audited consent further constrain different objects -- action directions versus cumulative trajectory states -- and neither dominates the other. A four-step exhaustive horizon-bounded solvability scheme is sound and complete under exact representation of the relay closure; restricted implementations remain sound on returned plans but need not be complete. The model gives one geometry for sequential mutual enabling, competent execution of steps whose purpose is invisible to the executor, forced sub-teaming at expertise boundaries, and completion that cannot be validly declared.
Create a lesson
Related papers
Social Laws for Multi-agent Coordination in Stochastic Environments
Rolando Fernandez, Caleb Probine, Tyler Lee et al.
ABM-SIRTEM: A Hybrid Agent-Based and Epidemiological Model for Pandemic Response
Sheryl Paul, Samuel Williams, Preetom K. Biswas et al.
Agentic Societies Need a Social Harness
Tapan Chugh, Vidushi Singh, Krish Jain et al.
Decomposition Buys Integrity, Not Yield
Rong He
Emergence World: Adversarial Stress-Testing of Long-Horizon Multi-Agent Systems
Deepak Akkil, Tamer Abuelsaad, Karthik Vikram et al.
Mo' Models, Mo' Problems: How to best select model pools when designing Multi-Agent Systems
Sara Vera Marjanović, Jiacheng Xu, Aleksandr Laptev et al.