arXiv:2606. 04223v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Multi-agent systems are commonly designed to reduce disagreement through voting, consensus protocols, debate, or fault-tolerant aggregation.
arXiv:2601. 05746v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Recent years have witnessed the rapid development of Large Language Model-based Multi-Agent Systems (MAS), which excel at collaborative decision-making and complex problem-solving.
arXiv:2604. 09679v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Multi-Agent Debate (MAD) is a collaborative framework in which multiple agents iteratively refine solutions through the generation of reasoning and alternating critique cycles.
arXiv:2607. 01251v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Debate, where AI agents argue opposing positions, has emerged as a key approach to scalable oversight.
arXiv:2606. 01828v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language model-driven multi-agent systems enhance the reliability of complex reasoning tasks through multi-round deliberation, role specialization, and cross-validation.
arXiv:2505. 23399v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: We propose GAM-Agent, a game-theoretic multi-agent framework for enhancing vision-language reasoning.
arXiv:2607. 09099v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: While multi-agent debate (MAD) frameworks have shown significant potential in general reasoning, their effectiveness in highly structured, knowledge-heavy legal domains remains under-explored.
arXiv:2608. 10665v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Multimodal large language models often generate reasoning chains containing subtle errors that lead to incorrect answers.
Large language model-based multi-agent systems (LLM-MAS) are designed through roles, debate protocols, and aggregation rules. These choices create implicit social expectations: agents may be expected to trust, challenge, defer to, or collaborate with peers.
Large language model-driven multi-agent systems enhance the reliability of complex reasoning tasks through multi-round deliberation, role specialization, and cross-validation. However, existing multi-agent debate and collaboration frameworks typically adopt fully connected communication, causing the number of messages, token costs, and end-to-end latency to grow approximately quadratically with the number of agents; although fixed sparse topologies reduce overhead, they cannot adapt communication relationships to different task instances or intermediate reasoning states, making them prone either to preserving low-value interactions or to losing critical error-correction information.
arXiv:2606. 29425v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Existing multi-agent debate frameworks suffer from two critical limitations: they rely on static architectures where agent roles and coordination patterns are fixed at design time, and they require instantiating multiple model copies, incurring substantial computational overhead.
arXiv:2606. 29026v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Multi-agent AI systems can improve answer selection by allowing different language models to exchange reasoning traces, revise initial predictions, and support a final decision.
arXiv:2608. 01463v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Multi-agent debate commonly exchanges complete rationales even when disagreements concern only a few intermediate claims.