arXiv:2608. 14375v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Multi-agent reasoning systems often use agreement, confidence, or automated scores to decide which messages should shape a final answer.
arXiv:2607. 28908v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Reflection, the ability to revisit and revise prior reasoning, is central to how humans improve their answers.
arXiv:2608. 02011v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Agentic retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) systems can fail before evidence-conditioned reasoning is tested: an agent may retrieve candidate snippets but finalize without inspecting them.
arXiv:2602. 04234v6 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Multi-agent systems (MAS) have emerged as a prominent paradigm for leveraging large language models (LLMs) to tackle complex tasks.
arXiv:2608. 07931v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large reasoning models (LRMs) are prone to hallucination, which undermines their reliability and poses challenges for safe deployment.
arXiv:2608. 04788v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language model agents are commonly trained through reinforcement learning with sparse trajectory-level rewards, which offer limited guidance on how strongly individual tokens should be updated.
arXiv:2607. 12267v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Language agents that interleave reasoning and tool use degrade sharply as reasoning chains lengthen, even when each individual step is easy.
arXiv:2607. 14552v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: A standard recipe for distilling the reasoning ability of large language models (LLMs) is to sample chains of thought from the model, keep those that reach the correct final answer, and fine-tune on the survivors.
arXiv:2603. 12109v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Reinforcement learning (RL) has become a de facto paradigm for building LLM-based agents that act, interact, and reason over extended task horizons.
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:2606. 11349v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: In hierarchical reasoning, failures often originate at intermediate decision points where the agent commits to a wrong branch without recognizing that it lacks critical information.
arXiv:2606. 02866v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: When does multi-agent debate help data cleaning, and when does it hurt?
arXiv:2607. 15439v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Our previous ARC-AGI-3 agent bundled executable world modeling, scheduled simplification, and exact replay verification, leaving unclear which idea accounted for its performance.