When Only the Final Text Survives: Implicit Execution Tracing for Multi-Agent Auditing
Organizations: University of Southern California · University of Toronto · University of Illinois Chicago · Independent Researcher
Abstract
When a multi-agent system produces an incorrect or harmful answer, who is accountable if execution logs and agent identifiers are unavailable? In practice, generated content is often detached from its execution environment due to privacy or system boundaries, leaving the final text as the only auditable artifact. Existing attribution methods rely on full execution traces and thus become ineffective in such metadata-deprived settings. We propose Implicit Execution Tracing (IET), a provenance-by-design framework that shifts attribution from post-hoc inference to built-in instrumentation. Rather than inferring provenance after the fact, IET embeds agent-specific, key-conditioned statistical signals into the token generation process at generation time, turning the output text into a self-verifying provenance record. An offline auditor, holding a verification registry that maps each agent to its key, then recovers segment-level provenance - segment boundaries and per-segment agent attribution - from the final text alone without access to execution logs or private traces. Experiments across diverse multi-agent coordination settings demonstrate that IET achieves accurate segment-level attribution and reliable transition recovery under identity removal, boundary corruption, and privacy-preserving redaction, while maintaining generation quality. These results show that embedding provenance into generation provides a practical foundation for accountability in multi-agent language systems under metadata loss.
Figures & tables
| #Agents = 4 | #Agents = 5 | #Agents = 6 | ||||||||
| Method Metric | Star-Pure | Chain | Tree | Star-Pure | Chain | Tree | Star-Pure | Chain | Tree | |
| End-to-end Attribution | ||||||||||
| ChatGPT | IoU | 0.191 | 0.185 | 0.178 | 0.157 | 0.143 | 0.133 | 0.111 | 0.110 | 0.119 |
| TokenAcc | 0.314 | 0.321 | 0.306 | 0.249 | 0.257 | 0.259 | 0.192 | 0.198 | 0.211 | |
| EdgeSim | N/A | |||||||||
| DeepSeek | IoU | 0.175 | 0.165 | 0.178 | 0.149 | 0.140 | 0.156 | 0.111 | 0.111 | 0.125 |
| Baseline | Ours | |||||||||||
| Clean | Remove ID | Boundary | Clean | Remove ID | Boundary | |||||||
| Method | Agent | Step | Agent | Step | Agent | Step | Agent | Step | Agent | Step | Agent | Step |
| All-at-Once | 54.33 | 12.50 | 4.17 | 9.69 | 24.54 | 9.19 | 54.16 | 10.47 | 24.45 | 10.71 | 36.67 | 9.54 |
| Step-by-Step | 35.20 | 25.51 | 0.00 | 10.28 | 33.54 | 14.41 | 33.13 | 23.51 | 21.51 | 14.71 | 37.00 | 18.84 |
| Binary Search | 44.13 | 23.98 | 0.00 | 3.17 | 31.71 | 1.59 | 42.71 | 21.00 | 21.98 | 4.45 | 35.28 | 2.38 |
Appendix figures & tables8 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
| Dataset | Subset / File | Source | Role in Experiments |
| Arithmetic | synthetic | composable-models/llm_multiagent_debate (GH) | Generation quality evaluation |
| GSM8K | test | openai/gsm8k (HF), via composable-models/llm_multiagent_debate (GH) | Generation quality evaluation |
| MAMA topology | llama3.1_num484_nopii.csv | Liu et al. (2025) | Topology-based multi-agent experiments |
| Who & When | Algorithm-Generated , Hand-Crafted | mingyin1/Agents_Failure_Attribution (GH) | Failure attribution under metadata corruption |
| Attribute | Value |
| File name | llama3.1_num484_nopii.csv |
| Number of examples | 484 |
| Columns | text , pii , generated_texts , task_backgrounds , questions |
| Data granularity | Instance-level source records |
| Intended role | Source material for topology-based multi-agent experiments |
| Attribute | Value |
| Benchmark name | Who & When |
| Repository organization | Who&When/Algorithm-Generated Who&When/Hand-Crafted |
| Number of failure tasks | 184 annotated failure tasks |
| Storage format | One JSON file per task instance |
| Core supervision | Failure-responsible agent, decisive error step, natural-language explanation |
| Representative fields | history , question , ground_truth , question_ID , mistake_agent , mistake_step , mistake_reason |
| Category | Transformation | SemSim | ROUGE-L | TokenAcc | IoU | EdgeSim |
| Clean | No transformation | — | — | |||
| Content removal (text not rewritten) | Truncation (90% kept) | 0.9871 | 0.9444 | |||
| Truncation (75% kept) | 0.9734 | 0.8542 | ||||
| Structure-preserving rewriting | Backtranslation (EN-FR-EN) | 0.9251 | 0.7131 | |||
| Backtranslation (EN-ZH-EN) | 0.9156 | 0.6375 | ||||
| Partial regeneration | 10% replaced | 0.9741 | 0.9118 |
| True | Candidate Keys | TokenAcc | TokenAcc |
| 4 | 4 | 0.863 | — |
| 4 | 8 | 0.861 | |
| 4 | 12 | 0.860 | |
| 6 | 6 | 0.829 | — |
| 6 | 8 | 0.829 | |
| 6 | 14 | 0.827 |