A lot of hype around agentic AI systems, but I'm honest: If somebody starts talking about agentic AI, I stop listening. Here is why: 𝐖𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐚𝐠𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐜 𝐀𝐈 𝐬𝐲𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐦𝐬? Large workflows that involve LLMs to control the data flow, call tools or make plans that depend on interim results are often called agentic AI. 𝐖𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐢𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐛𝐥𝐞𝐦? Agentic AI is a catch-all-phrase that basically involves any LLM-based system. People are claiming to build alls sorts of magic assistant with these stacks: Autonomous software engineers, personal travel agents and more. Because agentic AI can be everything and potentially do everything, there is a lot of hype and unrealistic expectations. 𝐇𝐨𝐰 𝐝𝐨𝐞𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐥𝐨𝐨𝐤 𝐥𝐢𝐤𝐞? We are at a point where "simple" LLM-based systems such as RAG are understood well enough to be deployed in production. But even then, debugging and securing such a system is still challenging. To think that we can do this for systems that potentially involve thousands of complex LLM calls to complete a single task is ridiculous. 𝐖𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐬𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐥𝐝 𝐰𝐞 𝐝𝐨 𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐢𝐭? First: Let's try to talk about the technology as concretely as possible: About RAG, text2sql, code completion, tool calling etc. Please don't talk about agentic AI! Second: Let's concentrate on the (very promising) use cases that can be delivered by "simple" AI systems: Technical support bots, coding assistants, data analytics assistants, knowledge management etc. Please don't talk about magic systems that run for days to complete some hyper complex task. What do you think? Are agentic AI systems the apex of AI hype? Or is there real substance behind the paradigm? #industrialai #agenticai #hype
Hi Stefan - like any new technology, agents are subject to positive ("something is coming and we talk about it") and "negative" (nothing is coming but we still talk about") hype. The potential positive and negative sides of hype IMHO are best represented by the Gartner hype cycle. On their Hype Cycle for Emerging Technologies 2024, they show the "plateau of productivity" for "autonomous agents" as well as for "multiagent systems" to be reached in 5-10 years. Before then, I am fraid they will need to pass the "Peak of Inflated Expecttations" which means the hype will become more rather than less. PS1: I personally am a big believer of agents - I do not like the term agentic AI - I am convinced they will be at the core of everybodys Personal Assistants - PA's - soon. (BTW: The difference between you and me is: I just talk; you - and other engineering type persons - need to build them 🙂) PS2: Stan Franklin and Arthur C. Graesser both University of Memphis, asked 25 years ago: "Is it an Agent, or Just a Program?: A Taxonomy for Autonomous Agents" https://www.researchgate.net/publication/221457111_Is_it_an_Agent_or_Just_a_Program_A_Taxonomy_for_Autonomous_Agents
If agents were so irrelevant, why would Amazon Web Services (AWS) bother about it?
💯 There's too much hype for magic automation. It's collaboration, the human is the agent, and AI accelerates, not replaces. Like word processors and spreadsheets, GPT saves time.
Sorry, Stefan, but this post was already in the making... (and will likely add to the agent hype... but then: I guess, a hype is like a "living" thing, you can't kill it. We probably actually nurture it by writing about it 🙂) https://www.linkedin.com/posts/aiinsider_hype-generative-ai-activity-7270699290132365312-wBGx?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop
Agree! And I’d suggest a third point: single out the measurable outcome increase vs. current ways to execute the use case. That’s what the whole “service as a software” hype should be about 😉
Could it be that we have structures that reward chasing the hype of the month more than helping last year's cutting edge tech to get to maturity? Would love to see a couple of mature RAG systems before everyone moves on to the next big thing.
I appreciate real experts like you lifting the curtain on concepts like these. When it comes to “agents”, I feel the concept is deliberately left vague. Out of ignorance? Or would demistifying the concept kill the hype?
Senior Data Scientist | Multi-Agent Systems | NLP | LLM
3moIronically, Stefan Suwelack, your post is rather an overgeneralization itself. I am working on practical customer operations workflow automation tasks. If I need to explain to stakeholders what we are doing, I could say we are utilizing multiple agents connected through a message bus, with the ability to call tools and perform heuristic validation functions organized hierarchically and capable of freely dispatching to other agents. Alternatively, I could simply say we are using a multi-agent system. I don't understand why that would be considered a bad thing.