AIVV: Neuro-Symbolic LLM Agent-Integrated Verification and Validation for Trustworthy Autonomous Systems

Large language model (LLM) multi-agent systems (MASs) solve complex tasks through interacting agents, yet their reliability is difficult to analyze because failures depend on both individual agents and how information and errors propagate across the system. Existing approaches largely treat this as post-hoc failure attribution, but do not provide a common model across heterogeneous MAS architectures or support broader analysis of information influence and observability. We introduce AgentSoV, a virtual-sensing framework that models MAS execution as a stochastic dynamic system through Stream of Variation (SoV). AgentSoV maps heterogeneous trajectories into diagnostic stages, constructs virtual measurements from observable outputs, and learns cross-stage variation propagation with a state-space model. Its representation is architecture-aware in stage dependencies yet architecture-agnostic in analytical language, supporting chain-structured, orchestration-based, and directed acyclic graph (DAG)-structured MASs. Without re-executing the MAS, AgentSoV supports three system-level analyses: failure attribution identifies where abnormal variation enters; stage-input influence quantifies how strongly intermediate inputs affect downstream outcomes; and virtual-sensor placement selects complementary observations under a monitoring budget. Experiments across multiple MAS architectures demonstrate a unified approach to fault localization, information influence, and observability. AgentSoV reframes agentic execution as a dynamic system to model rather than merely text to inspect, providing insights for MAS structure and component design.

Large language model-driven multi-agent systems (LLM-MAS) excel at complex tasks, yet unreliable agents remain a key bottleneck to system-level reliability. Automatic failure attribution is therefore critical, but existing approaches, such as direct prediction of agent-error pairs and agent-first failure attribution, rely on local logs of agents and miss global failures that only manifest over full interaction trajectories, such as cross-step inconsistencies and inter-agent coordination errors. Moreover, directly predicting failures induces a large combinatorial search space, hindering fine-grained attribution. To address these challenges, we propose VerifyMAS, a hypothesis verification framework for agent failure attribution. Instead of directly predicting faulty agents and error types, VerifyMAS formulates and verifies failure hypotheses against full trajectories. This verification-based approach decomposes attribution into trajectory-level error validation and fine-grained agent localization, providing an error-first attribution approach that captures global failure patterns while substantially reducing the search space. We further introduce a hypothesis-based data construction strategy grounded in a structured error taxonomy and fine-tune a specialized LLM verifier model for trajectory-level failure verification and agent attribution. Experiments on Aegis-Bench and Who&When show that VerifyMAS consistently improves diverse backbone models, including open-source Qwen and API-based GPT models, outperforming prior methods without sacrificing inference efficiency for long multi-agent trajectories.

As LLM agents undertake increasingly complex, long-horizon tasks, verifying their outputs becomes increasingly challenging. We study how verification capability can be strengthened with a fixed base model, without access to reference answers or grading rubrics at test time. Repeated sampling yields multiple rollouts that can contain complementary correct claims, but we need a reliable verification mechanism to determine which claims to trust. We first find that disagreement often exposes correct alternatives, while consensus can conceal errors. These observations motivate VeriHarness, which turns the underlying LLM a generator uses into an agentic verifier by giving it a workspace, evidence tools, and reusable verification skills. A disagreement resolver checks competing claims against environmental evidence, while a consensus challenger tests shared claims and searches for omitted requirements. Their findings guide the selection and revision of the final artifact. Across five long-horizon workspace benchmarks and two frontier models, VeriHarness achieves the highest selection scores among the evaluated baselines. Evidence-backed revision further improves average performance, bringing gains over a single rollout to 6.2 points with Gemini 3.5 Flash and 6.4 points with Claude Opus 4.8. We further show that verification skills can self-improve from failure feedback, demonstrating VeriHarness as a novel and critical approach for scaling long-horizon agentic verification. We release the full pool of approximately 26,000 rollouts across all five benchmarks and both models, produced at a cost of over $100,000, to support future research on agentic verification.