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.
Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv AI.
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.
The paper introduces AgentAuditor, a method that improves multi-agent large language model (LLM) reasoning by structuring agent outputs into a Reasoning Tree that captures agreements and divergences, rather than relying on simple majority voting. AgentAuditor resolves conflicts by comparing evidence at key divergence points, enabling efficient localized verification. The authors also propose Anti-Consensus Preference Optimization (ACPO) to train the adjudicator with evidence-verified supervision, reducing reliance on misleading majority cues. Across four MAS frameworks and multiple reasoning benchmarks, AgentAuditor consistently outperforms majority voting, achieving up to 5% absolute accuracy gains while remaining token‑efficient.
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.
Meta-Moderator is a learnable framework that treats moderation as a meta‑cognitive process, monitoring debate utility, controlling deliberation, and adjudicating final answers. It is trained independently of the debaters through outcome‑driven policy optimization, allowing dynamic regulation of debate rather than relying on fixed budgets or untrained judges. Across five benchmarks, Meta‑Moderator outperforms common decision layers, transfers across tasks and system configurations, and selectively allocates debate to reduce mis‑aggregation after informative hypotheses appear.