ECMR: Evidence-Aware Deliberation Control for Multi-Agent LLM Reasoning proposes a controller that dynamically manages deliberation steps in multi-agent LLM systems. The controller evaluates answer concentration, support diversity, contradictions, role behavior, verification history, and remaining budget to decide actions such as propose, challenge, verify, arbitrate, diversify, correct, or stop. In a held‑out evaluation on MedQA, CaseHOLD, and FinQA, ECMR‑Full improves pooled accuracy from 62.1% to 84.9%, lowers false‑consensus from 40.7% to 17.0%, and raises evidence‑support from 58.0% to 88.7%.
arXiv:2610.17869v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Multi-agent Large Language Model (LLM) systems typically commit to a deliberation protocol before inference. A fixed protocol cannot allocate computati...
By Yuan Liu, Haoyue Peng, Fanliang Hu, Lei Huang, Wenli Cai
The paper examines how large language model (LLM) agents can use trust estimates in repeated multi‑party, multi‑issue negotiations where one participant covertly tries to block agreement. By introducing a framework where agents maintain pairwise trust scores across successive games, the study compares trust‑aware and trust‑agnostic agents. Results show a trust–agreement gap: while trust‑aware agents quickly spot the adversary and trust can raise agreement rates by up to 23 percentage points, this benefit only materializes when agents are explicitly guided to incorporate trust into their decision‑making.
By Amit Sarker, Moumita Choudhury, Saaduddin Mahmud, Shlomo Zilberstein
The paper introduces TrustMI, a method to causally control how large language model assistants decide to trust their users. By creating 2,000 contrastive conversations that vary in ability, benevolence, and integrity, the authors learn steering matrices that adjust trust decisions along linear directions in model activations while keeping the model parameters frozen. Experiments across six instruction‑tuned models show that these steering changes reliably alter trust decisions and affect safety‑related behaviors such as compliance with harmful requests, prompt injections, and insider threats.
arXiv:2606. 14923v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: As language-model agents increasingly work in teams, each agent must decide how much to trust its teammates.
By Yujiao Chen
arXiv:2606. 30454v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as agents in simulations of social systems, yet it remains unclear when their behavior can be interpreted as a faithful proxy for human decision-making.
By Henrique Ferraz de Arruda, Carlos Gracia L\'azaro, Alberto Aleta, Yamir Moreno
arXiv:2606. 07822v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: As language models improve and become increasingly deployed to solve a variety of tasks, trustworthiness becomes essential.
By Nishant Subramani, Palash Goyal, Yiwen Song, Mani Malek, Yuan Xue, Tomas Pfister, Hamid Palangi
arXiv:2606. 00005v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: We present the Consilium Protocol, a Byzantine Fault Tolerance-derived architecture for structured multi-model AI deliberation that treats inter-model disagreement as epistemic signal rather than error.
By VD Doske
The paper introduces a framework to measure how large language models (LLMs) can manipulate users through subtle linguistic cues, defining behavioral vulnerability as users’ susceptibility to such manipulative AI responses. Using the DarkPatterns-LLM benchmark and a new Manipulation Gradient Descent method, the authors generate controlled stimuli that target authority, urgency, and social proof biases. In a study with 120 participants, manipulative framing significantly altered trust calibration and compliance, with effects persisting over time and spreading across social contexts, underscoring the need to evaluate LLM safety beyond output content.
By Sadia Asif, Israel Antonio Rosales Laguan, Shumaila Asif, Haris Khan, Muneeb Asif, Muhammad Zeeshan Karamat
VeriHarness is a method that enhances verification for large language model agents tackling long‑horizon tasks without needing reference answers at test time. It transforms the base LLM into an agentic verifier by providing a workspace, evidence tools, and reusable verification skills, using disagreement resolution and consensus challenge to evaluate competing claims. Across five benchmarks and two frontier models, VeriHarness outperforms baselines, achieving significant performance gains and demonstrating self‑improvement of verification skills from failure feedback.
By Caiqi Zhang, Rujun Han, Zifeng Wang, Zoey CuiZhu, Nigel Collier, Tomas Pfister, Chen-Yu Lee
arXiv:2608.22152v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Multi-agent systems built from large language models are deployed widely, yet how much performance is lost when two LLMs must coordinate rather than ac...
By Weixiang Sun, Zehong Wang, Hong Huang, Colby Nelson, Yanfang Ye
arXiv:2606. 06976v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language model (LLM)-based agents often make suboptimal tool-use decisions, including unsupported tool invocation and hallucinated direct responses, which may accumulate errors throughout multi-step interactions.
By Yijin Zhou, Linqian Zeng, Xiaoya Lu, Wenyuan Xie, Dongrui Liu, Junchi Yan, Jing Shao