arXiv (All)
open access
Multi-agent discussion gains less when dissent is withheld
Multi-agent systems of LLMs add discussion to majority voting and are therefore expected to be more capable. However, empirical reports conflict on whether discussion improves accuracy or leads to an incorrect consensus. Here, we introduce a parsimonious model that explains when discussion improves
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- Collective Regimes in Multi-Agent LLMs under Reasoning Effort and Communication Topology#1130727
- Do We Need Complex Topology Control? Distinct-Peer Random Routing Improves Cost-Efficiency in Sparse Multi-Agent Debate#1063361
- Evaluating the Capabilities of LLMs for Persuasive Dialogue#798369
- Evaluating the Capabilities of LLMs for Persuasive Dialogue#796956
- Auditing Multi-Agent LLM Reasoning Trees Outperforms Majority Vote and LLM-as-Judge#925106
Record · ID 1142925
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive