Event owner lens
Use this record to benchmark whether a comparable event makes the work after the room visible. The score is 45/100, so the next move is to benchmark the weakest pillars before repeating the format.
education training career agenda agenda analysis
2026 Conference - Workshops at ICLR 2026
This education training career agenda in Technology / AI / Startup shows 32 visible agenda rows from iclr26-mal-gai.github.io and scores 45/100: a moderate design signal with incomplete evidence. The clearest public signals sit in Future-of-Work Fit and Learning Transfer; the main limits are Follow Through and Network Design. Visible mechanisms include Participant work, Feedback, Network design, and Learning transfer. The public record does not show follow-up or tracking, so the score should be read as design... A practical reading: For a reader, this is a comparison record more than a model to copy: it reads as an education training career agenda, with the strongest visible signal in future-of-work fit and learning transfer and the biggest open question around follow through and network design. The practical test is whether the published agenda connects the room to post-event continuation and evidence. This page is an original public-evidence analysis, not a copy of the source agenda or an endorsement of the event. The score places the visible agenda in the moderate design signal band. The strongest visible pillars are Future-of-Work Fit, Learning Transfer, and Participation Architecture; the thinnest visible pillars are Follow Through, Network Design, and Problem Specificity. Visible mechanisms include Participant work, Feedback, Network design, and Learning transfer. The extracted agenda preview includes 58 visible rows. The most common formats are Workshop, Keynote, and Presentation; the most common inferred purposes are Co Creation, Knowledge Transfer, and Expert Framing.
Eight-pillar fingerprint
Hover any pillar to see what it measures and, where it scored low, what the agenda is missing.
Participation Architecture?61
Participation Architecture - 61/100. Participant work, contribution, interaction, and alternatives to passive broadcast.
Follow Through?5
Follow Through - 5/100. Owners, dates, commitments, progress checks, and accountability after the room.Missing: Add named owners, dates, implementation checkpoints, and a visible post-event continuation path.
Problem Specificity?40
Problem Specificity - 40/100. A clear costly problem, objective, decision, or performance target.Missing: Name the costly problem, decision, or performance target the gathering is meant to move.
Personalization?42
Personalization - 42/100. Role, path, goal, preparation, or connection tailoring for participants.
Network Design?38
Network Design - 38/100. Structured weak ties, bridge-building, mixers, and relationship persistence.Missing: Replace generic networking blocks with designed introductions, ask-offer exchanges, peer groups, or bridge-building rituals.
Learning Transfer?69
Learning Transfer - 69/100. Applied practice, feedback, workplace use, refreshers, and 30-90 day transfer.
Evidence Maturity?45
Evidence Maturity - 45/100. Baseline, comparison, follow-up, isolation, and attribution confidence.
Future-of-Work Fit?71
Future-of-Work Fit - 71/100. Value against time, hybrid reality, accessibility, AI, and meeting load.
Fix the gaps
Field-tested exercises matched to this agenda's weakest pillars, from the exercise library.
Follow Through (5/100)
Exercises that strengthen it: Mental Toughness Workshop • WorkshopBank · 15% Solutions • WorkshopBank · Network Patches
Network Design (38/100)
Exercises that strengthen it: Fun Trust-Building Group Game for Team Connection - Izzat... · Exciting Group Trust Activity for Building Confidence... · PFP: September 2005
Problem Specificity (40/100)
Exercises that strengthen it: 0 - “Two Person Scene” Theory · Challenge Axis - Knowmium: The Un-Training Consultancy · Fist to Five • WorkshopBank
Agenda Preview
The actual agenda we captured. Every block is classified by format and purpose. Open any block to see how we read it; the colored edge shows whether it is participant work, broadcast, logistics, or a showcase.
Room vs wrapper
29 percent of the 58 classified blocks put participants to work; the rest broadcast, show, or handle logistics. That mix is what drives the participation score.
Participant workBroadcastShowcaseLogistics
all eventWorkshop on Multi-Agent Learning and Its Opportunities in the Era of Generative AIWorkshopParticipant work+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisParticipant work is implied by the formatInferred from format
all eventICLR 2026 WorkshopWorkshopParticipant work+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisParticipant work is implied by the formatInferred from format
all eventFull papers presenting novel methods, theoretical analyses, or comprehensive empirical results related to the workshop topics.WorkshopParticipant work+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisParticipant work is implied by the formatInferred from format
all eventAdversarial training for improving the generalizability of the single LLM trainingTrainingSkill building+
Format · Participant workTrainingGuided skill building where participants practice. Counts as participant work and learning transfer.
Evidence basisParticipant work is implied by the formatInferred from format
all eventApplication of coordination graphs (e.g., DAGs, factor graphs, etc.) on decomposing reward functions for training multi-agent system LLMsTrainingSkill building+
Format · Participant workTrainingGuided skill building where participants practice. Counts as participant work and learning transfer.
Evidence basisParticipant work is implied by the formatInferred from format
11:59pmPaper Submission Deadline: 5 February 2026, AOE 10 February 2026, AOEPresentationKnowledge transfer+
Format · BroadcastPresentationSpeakers present, the audience receives. Awareness only unless paired with practice or follow-up.
Evidence basisNo participant output visible from this rowRead from source, no work signal
11:59pmNotification of Acceptance (hard deadline): 1 March 2026, AOEPresentationKnowledge transfer+
Format · BroadcastPresentationSpeakers present, the audience receives. Awareness only unless paired with practice or follow-up.
Evidence basisNo participant output visible from this rowRead from source, no work signal
11:59pmCamera-Ready Due: 3 April 2026, AOEPresentationKnowledge transfer+
Format · BroadcastPresentationSpeakers present, the audience receives. Awareness only unless paired with practice or follow-up.
Evidence basisNo participant output visible from this rowRead from source, no work signal
all eventSubmission Platform: All submissions will be managed through OpenReview.PresentationKnowledge transfer+
Format · BroadcastPresentationSpeakers present, the audience receives. Awareness only unless paired with practice or follow-up.
Evidence basisNo participant output visible from this rowRead from source, no work signal
all eventKeynote SpeakersKeynoteExpert framing+
Format · BroadcastKeynoteA featured talk from the stage. Builds awareness and energy, produces no participant output on its own.
Evidence basisNo participant output visible from this rowRead from source, no work signal
all eventPanel DiscussionPanelDiscussion+
Format · BroadcastPanelExperts discuss while the audience watches. Surfaces perspective but rarely creates participant work.
Evidence basisNo participant output visible from this rowRead from source, no work signal
09:00 - 09:15Opening Remarks 15 minutesOpeningOrientation+
Format · BroadcastOpeningFormat not classified from the source; treated as a broadcast block by default.
Evidence basisNo participant output visible from this rowRead from source, no work signal
09:15 - 09:55Invited Keynote 1 - Yali Du 40 minutesKeynoteExpert framing+
Format · BroadcastKeynoteA featured talk from the stage. Builds awareness and energy, produces no participant output on its own.
Evidence basisNo participant output visible from this rowRead from source, no work signal
09:55 - 10:30Break & Networking 35 minutesBreakRelationship building+
Format · LogisticsBreakA pacing or recovery block between sessions.
Evidence basisOutcome inferred from formatInferred from format
10:30 - 11:10Invited Keynote 2 - Peter Stone 40 minutesKeynoteExpert framing+
Format · BroadcastKeynoteA featured talk from the stage. Builds awareness and energy, produces no participant output on its own.
Evidence basisNo participant output visible from this rowRead from source, no work signal
11:10 - 11:55Oral Paper Presentations 1PresentationKnowledge transfer+
Format · BroadcastPresentationSpeakers present, the audience receives. Awareness only unless paired with practice or follow-up.
Evidence basisNo participant output visible from this rowRead from source, no work signal
11:55 - 13:00Lunch & Networking & Poster Session 1 65 minutesMealShowcase+
Format · LogisticsMealA pacing block. Can carry unstructured networking, not scored as participant work.
Evidence basisOutcome inferred from formatInferred from format
13:00 - 13:40Invited Keynote 3 - Elias Stengel-Eskin 40 minutesKeynoteExpert framing+
Format · BroadcastKeynoteA featured talk from the stage. Builds awareness and energy, produces no participant output on its own.
Evidence basisNo participant output visible from this rowRead from source, no work signal
13:40 - 14:20Invited Keynote 4 - Zhijing Jin 40 minutesKeynoteExpert framing+
Format · BroadcastKeynoteA featured talk from the stage. Builds awareness and energy, produces no participant output on its own.
Evidence basisNo participant output visible from this rowRead from source, no work signal
14:20 - 14:55Oral Paper Presentations 2PresentationKnowledge transfer+
Format · BroadcastPresentationSpeakers present, the audience receives. Awareness only unless paired with practice or follow-up.
Evidence basisNo participant output visible from this rowRead from source, no work signal
14:55 - 15:20Break & Networking 25 minutesBreakRelationship building+
Format · LogisticsBreakA pacing or recovery block between sessions.
Evidence basisOutcome inferred from formatInferred from format
15:20 - 16:00Invited Keynote 5 - Natasha Jaques 40 minutesKeynoteExpert framing+
Format · BroadcastKeynoteA featured talk from the stage. Builds awareness and energy, produces no participant output on its own.
Evidence basisNo participant output visible from this rowRead from source, no work signal
16:00 - 16:20Poster Session 2 20 minutesPoster sessionShowcase+
Format · ShowcasePoster sessionPresenters display work; attendees browse and ask questions. Some interaction, not structured work.
Evidence basisOutcome inferred from formatInferred from format
16:20 - 17:00Panel Discussion 40 minutesPanelDiscussion+
Format · BroadcastPanelExperts discuss while the audience watches. Surfaces perspective but rarely creates participant work.
Evidence basisNo participant output visible from this rowRead from source, no work signal
17:00 - 17:10Closing Remarks 10 minutesClosingOrientation+
Format · BroadcastClosingFormat not classified from the source; treated as a broadcast block by default.
Evidence basisNo participant output visible from this rowRead from source, no work signal
all event© 2025-2026 ICLR Workshop on Multi-Agent Learning and Generative AI.WorkshopParticipant work+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisParticipant work is implied by the formatInferred from format
all eventWorkshop on Multi-Agent Learning and Its Opportunities in the Era of Generative AIWorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventICLR 2026 WorkshopWorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventSubmit a PaperUnknownUnknown+
Format · BroadcastUnknownFormat not classified from the source; treated as a broadcast block by default.
Evidence basisLowRead from source
all eventThe rapid emergence of generative AI has revitalized interest in multi-agent learning as a foundation for building systems that can reason, coordinate, and adapt across diverse environments. This workshop seeks to explore the growing convergence between multi-agent learning and generative AI, emphasizing their mutual potential to advance both theoretical understanding and practical capability.WorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventBy bringing together researchers from machine learning, game theory, cognitive science, and human-computer interaction, this workshop aims to bridge methodological insights and emerging applications, fostering a shared agenda for the age of multi-agent generative AI systems.WorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventWe warmly invite submissions from researchers, practitioners, and students working at the intersection of multi-agent learning and generative AI. Accepted papers will be presented as posters, with a selection of outstanding submissions invited for spotlight or oral presentations. The workshop is non-archival.WorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventFull papers presenting novel methods, theoretical analyses, or comprehensive empirical results related to the workshop topics.WorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventAdversarial training for improving the generalizability of the single LLM trainingTrainingSkill Building+
Format · Participant workTrainingGuided skill building where participants practice. Counts as participant work and learning transfer.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventApplication of coordination graphs (e.g., DAGs, factor graphs, etc.) on decomposing reward functions for training multi-agent system LLMsTrainingSkill Building+
Format · Participant workTrainingGuided skill building where participants practice. Counts as participant work and learning transfer.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
11:59pmPaper Submission Deadline: 5 February 2026, AOE 10 February 2026, AOEUnknownUnknown+
Format · BroadcastUnknownFormat not classified from the source; treated as a broadcast block by default.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
11:59pmNotification of Acceptance (hard deadline): 1 March 2026, AOEUnknownUnknown+
Format · BroadcastUnknownFormat not classified from the source; treated as a broadcast block by default.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
11:59pmCamera-Ready Due: 3 April 2026, AOEUnknownUnknown+
Format · BroadcastUnknownFormat not classified from the source; treated as a broadcast block by default.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventSubmission Platform: All submissions will be managed through OpenReview.UnknownUnknown+
Format · BroadcastUnknownFormat not classified from the source; treated as a broadcast block by default.
Evidence basisLowRead from source
all eventNote: Submissions are required to use the provided workshop LaTeX template (download here). Double-blind review policy applies.WorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventLLM Usage Policy: We will follow the official ICLR 2026 Policies on Large Language Model Usage. In particular, AI systems may be used by workshop participants or organizers for supportive roles (e.g., language refinement, brainstorming, or discussion moderation), but AI-generated papers are not permitted for normal or tiny paper submissions. All AI contributions must remain under human oversight and validation, and the role of AI (if any) in the preparation of submissions must be transparently acknowledged.WorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventKeynote SpeakersKeynoteThought Leadership+
Format · BroadcastKeynoteA featured talk from the stage. Builds awareness and energy, produces no participant output on its own.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all eventPanel DiscussionPanelDeliberation+
Format · BroadcastPanelExperts discuss while the audience watches. Surfaces perspective but rarely creates participant work.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
09:00 - 09:15Opening Remarks 15 minutesOpening RemarksOrientation+
Format · BroadcastOpening RemarksFraming or welcome from the stage. Orients the room, not participatory.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
09:15 - 09:55Invited Keynote 1 - Yali Du 40 minutesKeynoteThought Leadership+
Format · BroadcastKeynoteA featured talk from the stage. Builds awareness and energy, produces no participant output on its own.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
09:55 - 10:30Break & Networking 35 minutesNetworkingRelationship Building+
Format · LogisticsNetworkingUnstructured mixing. Can carry incidental connection, but is not scored as designed network work.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
10:30 - 11:10Invited Keynote 2 - Peter Stone 40 minutesKeynoteThought Leadership+
Format · BroadcastKeynoteA featured talk from the stage. Builds awareness and energy, produces no participant output on its own.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
11:10 - 11:55Oral Paper Presentations 1PresentationKnowledge Transfer+
Format · BroadcastPresentationSpeakers present, the audience receives. Awareness only unless paired with practice or follow-up.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
11:55 - 13:00Lunch & Networking & Poster Session 1 65 minutesPoster SessionShowcase+
Format · ShowcasePoster SessionPresenters display work; attendees browse and ask questions. Some interaction, not structured work.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
13:00 - 13:40Invited Keynote 3 - Elias Stengel-Eskin 40 minutesKeynoteThought Leadership+
Format · BroadcastKeynoteA featured talk from the stage. Builds awareness and energy, produces no participant output on its own.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
13:40 - 14:20Invited Keynote 4 - Zhijing Jin 40 minutesKeynoteThought Leadership+
Format · BroadcastKeynoteA featured talk from the stage. Builds awareness and energy, produces no participant output on its own.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
14:20 - 14:55Oral Paper Presentations 2PresentationKnowledge Transfer+
Format · BroadcastPresentationSpeakers present, the audience receives. Awareness only unless paired with practice or follow-up.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
14:55 - 15:20Break & Networking 25 minutesNetworkingRelationship Building+
Format · LogisticsNetworkingUnstructured mixing. Can carry incidental connection, but is not scored as designed network work.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
15:20 - 16:00Invited Keynote 5 - Natasha Jaques 40 minutesKeynoteThought Leadership+
Format · BroadcastKeynoteA featured talk from the stage. Builds awareness and energy, produces no participant output on its own.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
16:00 - 16:20Poster Session 2 20 minutesPoster SessionShowcase+
Format · ShowcasePoster SessionPresenters display work; attendees browse and ask questions. Some interaction, not structured work.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
16:20 - 17:00Panel Discussion 40 minutesPanelDeliberation+
Format · BroadcastPanelExperts discuss while the audience watches. Surfaces perspective but rarely creates participant work.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
17:00 - 17:10Closing Remarks 10 minutesClosing RemarksOrientation+
Format · BroadcastClosing RemarksClosing framing from the stage. Wraps the event, not participatory.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
all event© 2025-2026 ICLR Workshop on Multi-Agent Learning and Generative AI.WorkshopCo Creation+
Format · Participant workWorkshopParticipants work on a problem and produce something. The strongest signal of participation architecture.
Evidence basisMediumRead from source
The Full Reading
Why It Ranks This Way +
Calibrated from GES design 46/100 and verified 45/100, then capped for no visible follow-up, tracking, or impact mechanism.
Reader Takeaway. For a reader, this is a comparison record more than a model to copy: it reads as an education training career agenda, with the strongest visible signal in future-of-work fit and learning transfer and the biggest open question around follow through and network design. The practical test is whether the published agenda connects the room to post-event continuation and evidence.
Strongest signals: Future-of-Work Fit, Learning Transfer, and Participation Architecture. Weakest signals: Follow Through, Network Design, and Problem Specificity.
How This Agenda Could Improve +
- Add named owners, dates, implementation checkpoints, and a visible post-event continuation path.
- Replace generic networking blocks with designed introductions, ask-offer exchanges, peer groups, or bridge-building rituals.
- Name the costly problem, decision, or performance target the gathering is meant to move.
Fastest next move: Add named owners, dated next steps, and a visible continuation path before treating the event as outcome-ready.
Role-Specific Reading +
Sponsor lens
Look beyond exposure. Strong sponsor value would show qualified interaction, problem work, buyer learning, customer evidence, or follow-up. The practical sponsor move is to look for structured introductions, buyer-seller fit, and relationship persistence.
Designer lens
The agenda is useful as a pattern sample from iclr26-mal-gai.github.io. Redesign attention should go first to the lowest-scoring pillars; in practice, turn the thinnest agenda blocks into participant work.
Executive lens
Treat the visible agenda as an operating plan. The executive move is to require owners, dates, and evidence before treating the event as strategic. If owners, proof, and follow-through are not visible, the public record does not yet prove strategic movement.
Aggregator lens
Treat the source URL as evidence, not decoration. The data-product move is to label the source boundary clearly before ranking the record before ranking or syndicating the record.
What GES Means Here +
The Gathering Effectiveness Score is a strict 0-100 public-evidence reading of the agenda across eight pillars. It rewards visible participant work, follow-through, transfer, network design, and proof mechanisms more than polish, speaker fame, attendance, or satisfaction.
Visible mechanisms: Participant work, Feedback, Network design, Learning transfer.
Evidence boundary: Scores reflect visible agenda/source evidence and should not be read as proof of causal event impact.
Limitations, Score Caps, and Review Flags +
Limitations
- No visible follow-up, progress monitoring, or longitudinal tracking.
- No baseline measurement is visible.
Score caps
- 42: No visible follow-up, tracking, or impact mechanism.
Review flags
- Fourth-loop score cap: No visible follow-up, tracking, or impact mechanism.
- No source-backed follow-up, validation, baseline, tracking, or impact evidence.
- No tracking, validation, feedback, or impact measurement found in the visible source text.
Is this proof the event worked? +
No. This is a strict public-evidence reading of the agenda. Proof would require baseline, comparison, follow-up, attribution, and impact evidence beyond the listing.
What should a reader inspect first? +
Start with the source URL, then compare the eight pillar scores against the agenda rows. The biggest opportunities usually sit in follow-through, evidence maturity, and participant work.
Why publish weak records? +
Weak records are part of the map. They show where public agendas still describe sessions and speakers more often than outcomes, commitments, transfer, or proof.
How should I use the rows? +
Read the agenda rows as the visible design trace: formats, purposes, and evidence labels show what the public source made inspectable, not everything that happened in the room. This is a source-grounded interpretation of the public agenda record, not a copy of the source, and not an endorsement of the event.
Embed the verified badge +
This record is in the hand-verified gold set. Copy the snippet below to embed the verified badge on your own site.
<a href="https://unitedwetransform.com/events/evt_2026_2026_conference_workshops_at_iclr_2026_jan_13_2026_workshop_on_multi_agent"><img src="https://unitedwetransform.com/badge/ges-verified.svg" alt="GES verified by United We Transform" height="40"></a>Where To Go Next
Compare this agenda against other Technology / AI / Startup events scored on the same eight pillars.