arXiv:2606. 00804v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Enterprise multi-agent systems increasingly expose multiple coordination patterns, but deployments often lack evidence for when to use consensus, debate, synthesis, or a simpler single-agent workflow.
arXiv:2606. 08340v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: As language models are increasingly deployed as autonomous agents, they must coordinate with others over long horizons in open-ended interactive tasks.
ERPBench is a benchmark that evaluates large language model agents in enterprise decision-making through a six‑round ERP simulation covering pricing, production, procurement, inventory, finance, and market competition. It tests the same 100 problems in two market ecologies—Solo, where agents compete against rule‑based opponents, and Arena, where six agents compete together—producing 1,200 model trajectories across 7,200 decision rounds. Results show that model performance varies by ecology, with DeepSeek best in Solo and Gemini best in Arena, and only 21 of 100 problems yield the same top performer across both settings.
arXiv:2606. 19111v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Team science holds that leadership is contingent: it helps only under specific conditions, and capable, autonomous teams may need none at all.
arXiv:2605. 22949v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Foundation-model pools are increasingly used as black-box responders in coordinated systems where a coordinator must decide which response to trust.
The paper introduces a two‑phase pipeline that mines reproducible design principles for large language model multi‑agent systems by reusing all intermediate search trajectories from an MCTS optimizer. Using six composable operators and 26 Enigmata tasks, the authors generate a corpus of 28,568 executable workflows and apply an AutoResearch loop to discover and validate orchestration patterns. Key findings include that Star‑first workflows underperform, SharedMemory outperforms debate, and prompt specificity and placeholder‑based routing provide comparable gains to communication‑structure selection.
The study evaluates four large language model agent architectures—single function‑calling, skill‑augmented, centralized multi‑agent orchestration, and triage swarm—across 13 enterprise standard operating procedures (SOPs). Results show no single architecture dominates; success varies with SOP complexity, and added structural complexity often incurs higher token usage and latency without significant performance gains. The research highlights that implementation quality, rather than the choice between single or multi‑agent designs, is the key determinant of task success.
AgentAudit is an open, extensible framework that evaluates the full lifecycle of AI agents, assessing planning, tool selection, execution, memory, and reasoning across ten dimensions such as instruction integrity, security, and alignment. Unlike existing benchmarks that focus on single aspects, AgentAudit analyzes the entire execution trace to attribute failures to specific stages. The framework was tested on five large language models, revealing significant differences in trustworthiness even among models with similar task‑completion performance.
The paper introduces Degrees of Freedom (DoF), a continuous framework that measures how much decision-making is delegated to agents in large language model–based multi‑agent systems. By varying DoF, the authors explore a spectrum between fully centralized and fully decentralized coordination, finding that intermediate settings often outperform both extremes across several task domains. The study shows that task characteristics and retained experience influence how coordination granularity affects performance, offering empirical guidance for designing hybrid coordination regimes.
arXiv:2607.22465v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Modern enterprise agent deployments consist of a heterogeneous pool of large language models (LLMs) having diverse capabilities and cost. Existing...
The paper introduces NP‑Bench, a benchmark and a proactive scheduling planner that coordinates parallel large‑language‑model coding agents. By partitioning work scopes and ordering merges ahead of time, the planner improves clean‑integration rates from 1/9 to 9/9 and eliminates merge conflicts, outperforming both no‑coordination and reactive‑detection baselines. It also demonstrates that cross‑session memory can eliminate repeated mistakes and that routing facts to agents does not improve long‑context accuracy at scale.
The paper introduces EvidenceNet, a runtime assurance layer designed to verify that coordinated AI agent operations achieve an operator’s intended network-wide outcomes across multiple administrative domains. EvidenceNet collects post-change observations from the required authority scopes, checks their freshness and validity, and uses a verifier agent to assess observation content. Experiments on live routing networks demonstrate that this approach can detect successful outcomes that configuration-action logs alone miss, and it rejects completions when observations are sourced incorrectly, substituted, or stale.
arXiv:2604. 07667v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Multi-agent debate improves LLM reasoning, yet agreement is not evidence of correctness.