arXiv:2608. 16801v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: We study how teams of AI coding agents coordinate while solving programming tasks.
By Giuseppe Destefanis, Tomaso Aste
arXiv:2609.15309v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Large language model (LLM) agents allocate test-time compute adaptively as they revise solutions, use tools, explore alternatives, and decide when to s...
By Kaiyuan Liu, Qiuyang Mang, Bo Peng, Wenhao Chai, Hanchen Li, Shreyas Pimpalgaonkar, Luke Zettlemoyer, Alex Dimakis, Alvin Cheung
DIANOIA introduces a diagnostic framework for multi‑agent large language model systems, decomposing reasoning gain into three measurable channels—coverage, fidelity, and synthesis. The protocol identifies bottleneck channels for a given task and implements a corresponding multi‑agent system with role‑diverse proposers, execution‑grounded verification, and iterative synthesis. Experiments on GSM8K, AIME‑2025, MBPP, and BFCL‑SP show that DIANOIA outperforms strong baselines, achieving significant token savings and accuracy gains while accurately pinpointing the critical channels.
By Yiming Yang, Zhuoyuan Li, Fanxiang Zeng, Hao Fu, Yue Liu
arXiv:2606. 26158v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: When a benchmark's accuracy saturates, it is often retired and replaced with a more challenging version.
By Nitya Nadgir, Sayash Kapoor, Kangheng Liu, Peter Kirgis, Matilda Orona, Stephan Rabanser, Tilman Bayer, Abhishek Shetty, Yue Ling, Derrick Chan-Sew, Rumi Nakagawa, Saiteja Utpala, Zachary S. Siegel, Arvind Narayanan
arXiv:2609.22682v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Collective intelligence depends not only on what team members know, but also on how they organize their work. When the structure of a solution is unkno...
By Aneesh Pappu, Mirac Suzgun, Yongchan Kwon, Federico Bianchi, Batu El, Mykel J. Kochenderfer, Hancheng Cao, James Zou
The paper investigates how scaling a team of small language‑model agents affects performance across different orchestration architectures. By testing eight architectures on five short‑answer benchmarks and an executable‑code benchmark, it finds that team scaling yields large gains on arithmetic word‑problem tasks but only modest improvements on multiple‑choice and code generation tasks, with no single architecture dominating all tasks. The authors explain these patterns using a generate‑transform decomposition that separates coverage and transformation effects, showing that arithmetic tasks benefit from both coverage and critic‑guided transformation, while other tasks are limited by saturation or poor conversion.
By Blaz Bertalanic, Carolina Fortuna