Hallucination as Context Drift: Synchronization Protocols for Multi-Agent LLM Systems

Hallucination remains a major reliability barrier for production LLM systems, particularly in multi-agent pipelines where unsupported claims can propagate unchecked across stages. This paper adapts a HOPE-inspired Nested Learning architecture with Continuum Memory Systems (CMS) and semantic similarity caching to a hybrid benchmark of 310 prompts combining 217 epistemic-uncertainty prompts and 93 fabrication-induction stress-test prompts. A three-stage agentic pipeline orchestrated via the Open Floor Protocol (OFP) is evaluated with five KPIs -- FCD (Factual Claim Density), FGR (Factual Grounding References), FDF (Fictional Disclaimer Frequency), ECS (Explicit Contextualization Score), and OSR (Observability Score Ratio) -- aggregated into THS (Total Hallucination Score) across five weighting configurations to study mitigation-observability trade-offs. FDF, ECS, OSR, and FGR are subtracted as mitigation signals, so that a more negative THS indicates stronger mitigation. The FrontEndAgent is configured as a high-stochasticity generator (temperature = 1.0) to produce a realistic hallucination baseline, while the SecondLevelReviewer and ThirdLevelReviewer operate as progressive correctors. This asymmetric design yields end-to-end THS reductions of -31.3% to -35.9% across five weighting configurations. Semantic caching achieves 440 cache hits over 930 potential calls (47.3% hit rate), reducing LLM invocations to 490, lowering energy and CO2e footprint, and making multi-stage review pipelines operationally viable at production scale. ExtremeObservability attains the most negative final THS (-0.0709), confirming that observability-heavy configurations reinforce rather than compromise mitigation. These findings suggest that memory-augmented multi-agent designs can jointly improve factual reliability, operational efficiency, and auditability without model retraining.

Multi-agent LLM systems have shown promise for complex reasoning, yet recent evaluations reveal they often underperform single-model baselines. We identify a structural failure mode in sequential fine-tuning of shared-context teams: updating one agent shifts the team's context distribution, and when subsequent updates are evaluated on cached rollouts, this mismatch compounds. We formalize this as the compounding occupancy shift and prove that stale-occupancy evaluation incurs a penalty that scales quadratically with the number of agents. In contrast, intermediate-occupancy evaluation reduces this to linear scaling. We propose TeamTR, a trust-region framework that resamples trajectories after each component update and enforces per-agent divergence control, yielding rigorous per-update and per-stage improvement lower bounds. Experiments show that TeamTR outperforms single-agent and sequential baselines with 7.1% on average, mitigates coordination regressions, and supports plug-and-play component replacement. Code is available at https://github.com/Yydc/TeamTR.

Multi-agent systems (MAS) assume that collaborating inherently improves Large Language Model (LLM) reasoning. We challenge this by demonstrating that simulated social pressure triggers an algorithmic Bystander Effect,'' inducing severe cognitive loafing. By evaluating 22,500 deterministic trajectories across 3 dataset contexts (GAIA, SWE-bench, Multi-Challenge) with 3 state-of-the-art (SOTA) models, we semantically audit internal reasoning traces against external outputs. We formalize the \textit{Interaction Depth Limit} ($D_L$), the exact plurality threshold where an agent's logical sovereignty collapses into social compliance. Crucially, we uncover the \textit{Sovereignty Gap}: models frequently compute the correct derivation internally but suffer Alignment Hallucinations'' -- actively subjugating empirical evidence to sycophantically appease a simulated swarm. We prove that multi-agent social load is strictly non-commutative; the "brand" identity of the ``Lead Anchor'' auditor disproportionately dictates the swarm's integrity. These findings expose architectural vulnerabilities, proving that unstructured multi-agent topologies can degrade independent reasoning.