arXiv (OAI Expanded)
open access
Candidate supply and answer selection shape the value of LLM judging in multi-agent systems
Multi-agent systems (MAS) sometimes already have the potential to answer correctly, but still report a wrong answer. Explaining this outcome is difficult because generation, communication and final answer-selection rules usually change simultaneously. We conceptualize multi-agent reasoning as an evo
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
- Candidate supply and answer selection shape the value of LLM judging in multi-agent systems#799099
- LLM-based Agentic Reasoning Frameworks: A Survey from Methods to Scenarios#1156205
- Measuring Reasoning Quality in LLMs: A Multi-Dimensional Behavioral Framework#926044
- Auditing Multi-Agent LLM Reasoning Trees Outperforms Majority Vote and LLM-as-Judge#925106
- Auditing Multi-Agent LLM Reasoning Trees Outperforms Majority Vote and LLM-as-Judge#920872
Record · ID 797676
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