Learning to Choose: An Empowerment-Guided Multi-Agent System with semantic communication for Adaptive Method Selection
Authors: Geremy Loachamín-Suntaxi, Robert Lazar, Dimitrios G. Giovanis, Ioannis G. Kevrekidis, Eleni D. Koronaki
Abstract
Automating scientific computing workflows requires more than generating executable code: autonomous systems must also select appropriate computational strategies, implement them faithfully, and ensure that the resulting outcomes remain causally attributable to the decisions that produced them. In multi-agent pipelines, this process is particularly fragile, as small inconsistencies between agent intentions and actions can lead to semantic drift, where the eventually executed procedure no longer reflects the originally selected strategy, thereby corrupting downstream evaluation and adaptation. In this work, motivated by the ATHENA framework (Toscano et al., 2025; Toscano et al., 2026) and the concept of empowerment (Yiu et al., 2025), we introduce a multi-agent framework that combines contextual bandits with structured inter-agent communication and, most importantly, semantic checkpoints that preserve action-outcome fidelity throughout the pipeline. The system integrates specialized large language model (LLM) agents, grounded code generation, and self-healing execution loops within an adaptive decision-making architecture. Interpreting the framework through the lens of empowerment, we show that reliable autonomous learning requires not only identifying high-quality actions, but also preserving the integrity of their propagation across agents. Using sensitivity analysis and uncertainty quantification workflows as representative case studies, we demonstrate that unchecked semantic drift degrades policy learning, whereas the proposed framework improves convergence, robustness, and adaptation to novel problem contexts. These results suggest a broader design principle for scientific multi-agent systems: adaptive decision-making must be coupled with explicit mechanisms that guarantee semantic consistency and reliable information flow across the computational pipeline.
AI agents are increasingly used to solve complex, multi-step tasks, but existing multi-agent frameworks remain brittle as workflows grow in scale and depth. Small errors at intermediate stages can propagate through agent interactions, while insufficient grounding and weak verification mechanisms further limit reliability. We present Meta-Agent, a two-phase framework that automatically constructs and executes specialized multi-agent systems from natural-language task descriptions. In the construction phase, a task planner decomposes a problem into a directed acyclic graph of agent specifications with explicit input/output contracts and verification criteria. A web search module grounds each specification with external evidence, and a code generation module produces system prompts and tool configurations. A construction-time verification stage then validates generated artifacts and triggers targeted regeneration when failures are detected. In the execution phase, a coordinator dispatches subtasks across the agent graph while execution-time verification gates intermediate outputs. We further introduce a three-level error attribution mechanism that distinguishes local, upstream, and structural failures, enabling targeted recovery strategies ranging from localized retries to partial re-execution and re-decomposition. We evaluate Meta-Agent across coding, contextual learning, and open-ended reasoning tasks. Experiments against strong multi-agent baselines and ablation studies demonstrate consistent improvements in task success rate, error recovery, and workflow stability. The results highlight the importance of tightly integrating planning, grounding, and verification for building reliable multi-agent systems.
Large Language Models (LLMs) have enabled collaborative Multi-Agent (MA) systems, where interacting agents improve performance through diverse reasoning and iterative refinement. However, these systems remain vulnerable to error propagation, where early-stage information degrades downstream reasoning. To address this, we conduct a systematic analysis of inter-agent communication to identify which information drives MA performance. We find that the absence of reasoning and verification in inter-agent communication significantly degrades performance. Based on these insights, we propose Category-Aware Recovery Augmentation (technique), which enforces the presence of critical information during communication. recovers up to 86.2% of failed cases. Our results highlight the key role of information quality in effective MA collaboration. Our code is available at https://anonymous.4open.science/r/cara_mas
Prompt optimization can improve multi-agent LLM systems, but the prompts being optimized often serve two entangled roles: generating task-relevant content and specifying execution-critical protocols, such as message routing, output formatting, and termination signals, on which the underlying code relies. As a result, a prompt edit intended to improve content generation can inadvertently corrupt the protocol and cause the entire agent pipeline to fail. Our key observation is that these two roles have different representations: execution protocols are typically structured, while task-relevant content is usually expressed in unstructured language. Based on this, we propose control-data flow separation, where execution-critical control is represented as typed, validated program objects, while task-relevant language remains the optimizable data flow for agent communication. This design allows optimizers to improve multi-agent behavior without exposing the routing or formatting interface to prompt drift. Across synthetic reasoning, collaborative review generation, and insurance rating workflows, our framework empirically achieves 100% eventual protocol validity while consistently improving task performance.
Wentao Zhang, Syed Shariyar Murtaza, Junaid Ahmad Bhatti +4