arXiv:2608. 14588v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Sequential multi-agent LLM pipelines chain specialized agents without verification at handoffs, creating a structural flaw with measurable and severe consequences.
arXiv:2607. 06503v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language model (LLM) agents solving multi-step tasks frequently commit to trajectories that are doomed to fail, yet continue to consume substantial inference compute before the failure becomes observable.
The paper introduces a benchmark for evaluating large language models (LLMs) on long‑horizon state tracking by having them compute the MD5 hash through 196 dependent tool calls across 64 rounds, carrying four 32‑bit words in context. It shows that a mixture‑of‑experts LLM can maintain the full state and produce correct digests in most runs, even when all primitive tools are replaced by another LLM. The study isolates state‑tracking difficulty from instruction interpretation and identifies key factors—contextual reasoning and worker voting—that enable success.
arXiv:2601.22984v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Diagnosing failure patterns in Deep Research Agents (DRAs) remains a critical challenge. Existing benchmarks predominantly rely on end-to-end evalu...
arXiv:2608. 06949v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Prior benchmarking work has shown that a single large language model (LLM), forced to make life-or-death resource-allocation decisions, exhibits measurable demographic bias.
Large language model (LLM) agents solving multi-step tasks frequently commit to trajectories that are doomed to fail, yet continue to consume substantial inference compute before the failure becomes observable. We show that failure is predictable early from the agent's internal representations: lightweight per-round probes on hidden activations anticipate eventual episode failure as early as the first interaction round, where scorers reading only the agent's observable behavior are barely better than chance.
arXiv:2609.25686v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Long-horizon assigned work requires an LLM agent to track the state of a task: which steps are done, blocked, cancelled, or open to repetition. Agent...
Multi-agent systems split a task across a tree of agents and justify the split with folklore: smaller contexts, cleaner separation, parallelism. We ask what the split does to how much of what the leav...
arXiv:2608. 08239v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: LLM routers promise efficiency by matching each request to the cheapest adequate model, and are increasingly applied per step inside multi-step agents.
arXiv:2607. 18292v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Bigger language models are less reliable.
arXiv:2609.07065v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Agent-to-agent (A2A) alpha discovery is slowed by repeated feedback cycles between mining and evaluation agents, whose hand-offs, in contemporary LLM m...
arXiv:2606. 07846v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: LLM-agent workflows chain model calls and tool invocations, and spend most of their wall-clock time waiting on upstream operations before downstream ones can start.
arXiv:2607. 07405v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Tool-using LLM agents can violate the very policies they are deployed to enforce while appearing to complete the task successfully.