Lossy Event Compression: From Event Stream Distortion to Task Performance

Event cameras generate asynchronous, sparse data streams with microsecond temporal resolution, but in moderate-to-high motion scenes they can produce as many as hundreds of millions of events per second, creating significant bandwidth and storage challenges. Lossy compression is therefore essential for practical deployment, yet existing event stream distortion metrics fail to reliably predict compression-induced degradation at the task level, forcing codec optimization to rely on expensive task-specific evaluations. To address this gap, this paper introduces two fundamentally different event compression pipelines: i) an aggregation-based pipeline that converts the event stream into polarity-based histogram frames for compression with the conventional image codec JPEG 2000, and ii) a frame-free point cloud-based pipeline that codes events natively as 3D points using the octree-based codec G-PCC. Both pipelines are then assessed within a unified task-driven evaluation framework that relates event stream distortion to downstream application performance across four representative tasks: i) video reconstruction, ii) object detection, iii) optical flow estimation, and a delay-sensitive task iv) asynchronous feature tracking under a reference-relative protocol. Building on this framework, five classification-based distortion metrics are applied to event compression for the first time, to the best of the authors' knowledge, and benchmarked against existing event stream metrics. Experimental results demonstrate that the proposed metrics reliably predict compression-induced task degradation across different coding frameworks. This demonstrates that event stream distortion assessment can be an efficient alternative to repeated task-specific evaluation, providing direct guidance for the development and optimization of future event data coding solutions.

When Does Personality Composition Matter for Multi-Agent LLM Teams?

Personality prompting shapes how large language models communicate, yet whether these behavioral shifts affect objective task outcomes remains under-explored. Prior work shows that agents prompted with low agreeableness produce adversarial language, while those prompted with high agreeableness become cooperative, but the relationship between communication style and task performance has not been systematically examined across multiple domains. In this work, we investigate whether personality composition matters for multi-agent team performance by manipulating personality traits across frontier LLMs on three task domains: structured coding, open-ended research collaboration, and competitive bargaining. We find that personality effects depend critically on task structure. In coding tasks, low agreeableness leads to large communication shifts that have little effect on milestone completion. In open-ended collaboration and bargaining, the same manipulation substantially degrades performance. We discuss implications for multi-agent system design and the limits of personality manipulation.

Artificial collectives of specialists and generalists excel at different tasks

Collective artificial intelligence, where multiple agents work on shared tasks, holds potential to solve expansive problems in fields from medicine to collective governance. But while prescriptive engineering solutions abound, we lack descriptive scientific understanding of artificial collectives, and therefore principles for how to design resource efficient multi-agent systems. Through systematic experiments with optimizing agents, we characterize how agent interpretive abilities, rationality bounds, and task qualities interact to shape collective performance. Agents range from specialists, with narrow interpretive abilities, to generalists, with broad ones. Collectives of specialists correspond to sparse, centralized networks, while collectives of generalists correspond to dense, decentralized ones. We show that interpretive network properties have small performance effects on average (0.07 standard deviations of performance). However, for specific task qualities, these effects are 4.5 times larger (0.33 sd) and can reach much higher for certain task qualities (1.84 sd). This leads collectives of generalists to perform better on tasks that involve generating, choosing, and coordinating, while collectives of specialists with a few generalist mediators perform better on tasks that involve negotiating. Rationality bounds then moderate these relationships. At loose bounds, specialists outperform generalists through more effective sampling of high-dimensional decision spaces. At tight bounds, generalists outperform specialists through better gradient estimation. A fundamental trade-off between performance and convergence speed emerges at moderate bounds. These findings suggest that multi-agent design could benefit from matching interpretive networks to both task demands and agents' computational limits, with implications for the efficiency and energy costs of multi-agent systems.