See-Kiong Ng

Multi-agent role-playing has recently shown promise for studying social behavior with language agents, but existing simulations are mostly monolingual without cross-lingual interaction, an essential property of real societies. We introduce MAWM, the first Multilingual Agent-based World Modeling framework that supports multi-turn multilingual interactions among generative agents with diverse sociolinguistic profiles. MAWM enables two modes of analysis: (i) global public opinion modeling, which tracks how attitudes toward open-domain survey questions evolve across languages and cultures, and (ii) media influence and information diffusion, via autonomous news agents that dynamically generate content and shape user behavior. To ground the simulation in realistic population distributions, we construct the MAPS benchmark, which combines survey questions and demographic personas drawn from global population distributions. Experiments on simulation alignment, along with social science case studies on cultural assimilation and normative diffusion, show that native-language simulation better reflects real survey data than English-only simulation, and that the agent society in MAWM reproduces established sociocultural phenomena and highlights the value of multilingual simulation as an alternative interpretable tool for computational social science.

Test-time scaling increases inference-time computation through longer reasoning chains and has shown strong performance gains across many domains. However, frontier models still suffer from factuality hallucinations, raising the question of whether increased computation is effective on closed-book knowledge-intensive tasks. In this work, we evaluate 14 reasoning models under different test-time scaling strategies. Our results challenge its effectiveness: increasing test-time computation does not consistently improve accuracy and often leads to more hallucinations. We find that changes in hallucination rates are largely driven by the model's willingness to answer, as longer reasoning encourages more attempts, many of which are incorrect. We also observe patterns consistent with confirmation bias, where extended reasoning reinforces early incorrect beliefs with fabricated details. Finally, we provide an information-theoretic perspective showing that compute-only test-time scaling, as a post-processing procedure of a fixed model, cannot introduce new information about the ground-truth answer, explaining the limited performance gains. Overall, our findings highlight important limitations of current test-time scaling methods for closed-book knowledge-intensive tasks.