arXiv:2606. 27409v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Multi-agent large language model (LLM) systems often rely on verifier and critic agents to suppress hallucinations, but verification is delayed.
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.
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:2608. 10665v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Multimodal large language models often generate reasoning chains containing subtle errors that lead to incorrect answers.
arXiv:2605. 09076v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language model (LLM) agents increasingly collaborate over peer-to-peer networks to improve their reliability.
arXiv:2607. 01951v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly consulted on contested scientific questions, raising the concern that they will sycophantically retreat from established consensus when a user signals doubt -- drifting toward a false balance that treats settled science as one view among several.
arXiv:2607. 03695v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language model (LLM) agents are increasingly deployed in interacting populations, raising the question of what such populations come to believe collectively.
arXiv:2606. 19494v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Multi-agent LLM deliberation, where agents exchange and revise answers over several rounds, is increasingly used to improve reasoning and accuracy, yet how and why it works is rarely modelled.
arXiv:2608. 10430v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) deployed as AI agents frequently exhibit user specification-grounding failures, executing hallucinated, undesired actions to force a resolution rather than expressing uncertainty.
arXiv:2606. 29713v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Hallucination is the reliability bottleneck for LLM-based agents, and fact attribution verifiers are the last line of defense -- yet today's verifiers emit only opaque binary labels, leaving agents unable to self-correct and operators unable to audit.
arXiv:2510. 20963v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Multi-agent debate (MAD) was proposed as a promising approach for ensembling the wisdom of multiple large language models (LLMs) to improve reasoning and provide effective supervision to superhuman LLMs.
arXiv:2606. 02866v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: When does multi-agent debate help data cleaning, and when does it hurt?
arXiv:2606. 05976v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Recent work shows that LLM agents struggle to correct errors in their own reasoning traces yet show markedly higher correction rates when identical claims appear under external sources.