ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2025
Comparing cooperative geometric puzzle solving in ants versus humans.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Understanding Basic Concepts of Viral Quasispecies: From Evolutionary Dynamics to Clinical Relevance.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Heuristic rules for cooperative transport in wood ant nest maintenance.The Journal of experimental biology · 2026Article
- Arachidonic acid availability controls neutrophil swarm initiation and scaling.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Mind Everywhere: A Framework for Conceptualizing Goal-Directedness in Biology and Other Domains-Part Two.Biological theory · 2026Article
- Mind Everywhere: A Framework for Conceptualizing Goal-Directedness in Biology and Other Domains-Part One.Biological theory · 2026Article
- Best-of-n decision making by human groups.PloS one · 2026Article
- The emergent property of inhibitory control: implications of intermittent network-based fNIRS neurofeedback training.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Biological ensembles use collective intelligence to tackle challenges together, but suboptimal coordination can undermine the effectiveness of group cognition. Testing whether collective cognition exceeds that of the individual is often impractical since different organizational scales tend to face disjoint problems. One exception is the problem of navigating large loads through complex environments and toward a given target. People and ants stand out in their ability to efficiently perform this task not just individually but also as a group. This provides a rare opportunity to empirically compare problem-solving skills and cognitive traits across species and group sizes. Here, we challenge people and ants with the same "piano-movers" load maneuvering puzzle and show that while ants perform more efficiently in larger groups, the opposite is true for humans. We find that although individual ants cannot grasp the global nature of the puzzle, their collective motion translates into emergent cognitive skills. They encode short-term memory in their internally ordered state and this allows for enhanced group performance. People comprehend the puzzle in a way that allows them to explore a reduced search space and, on average, outperform ants. However, when communication is restricted, groups of people resort to the most obvious maneuvers to facilitate consensus. This is reminiscent of ant behavior, and negatively impacts their performance. Our results exemplify how simple minds can easily enjoy scalability while complex brains require extensive communication to cooperate efficiently.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.