Large language model (LLM)-based agents and multi-agent systems increasingly tackle complex tasks through long-horizon tool use and inter-agent collaboration. However, these systems are prone to deviating from the overall goal as execution unfolds, which wastes execution resources and leads to undesired outcomes, a failure termed goal drift. In this work, we propose a steering agent that supervises execution on the fly and steers the system back on track when drift occurs. The steering agent observes the execution context, deciding when to intervene with a low-cost fast path and how to intervene with a high-cost slow path. To unlock its steering intelligence, the ability to assess goal drift and generate effective interventions, we jointly train the two paths with reinforcement learning, combining a pairwise ranking objective with group-relative policy optimization (GRPO). Experiments on information-seeking search tasks show that the steering agent provides effective supervision for both single-agent and multi-agent systems, improving their performance and efficiency. The learned steering intelligence generalizes to out-of-domain tasks, transfers to unseen executors, and supports controllable intervention frequency without retraining.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Scheme comparison of planning, verification, and steering. (a) Execution can deviate from an initial plan. (b) Verification can cause costly retries. (c) Steering provides on-the-fly intervention to keep the system on track.
Figure 2: Goal drift example in single-agent and multi-agent executions. (a) The agent keeps investigating the same topic after obtaining enough information, wasting execution on unproductive actions. (b) The verifier repeatedly rejects answers the searchers have already delivered, sending execution into repeated revision rounds.
Figure 3: Steering agent and reinforcement learning pipeline. (a) The steering agent decides whether to intervene with the fast path and how to intervene with the slow path. (b) The RL pipeline samples states from previous rollouts, samples several steering actions at each selected state, and jointly updates the two paths with a pairwise ranking objective and GRPO.
Method
Multi-Hop QA
Single-Hop QA
Overall
Cost
2Wiki
Hotpot
Bamboogle
MuSiQue
NQ
Trivia
Pop
Avg.
Δ
#Act.
Turns
No Intervention
36.9
46.9
38.4
20.8
46.8
60.6
48.5
42.70
–
–
6.4
Planning
38.1
45.0
43.6
21.9
47.9
61.3
48.4
43.74
+1.04
1.00
8.0
w/ RL
46.5
49.7
45.9
22.9
47.5
61.4
47.5
45.91
+3.21
1.00
8.8
Verification
35.2
43.8
44.6
19.3
44.1
60.8
43.2
41.57
−1.13
1.22
7.8
w/ RL
40.8
51.1
39.9
20.9
51.1
61.4
48.9
44.87
+2.17
1.08
6.8
Table 1: Results on in-domain benchmarks. Δ is the gain in Avg. over No Intervention, and Cost reports steering actions (#Act.) and executor turns (Turns) per task. Best results are in bold.
Method
Frames
GAIA
xBench-DS
Avg@4
Pass@4
Avg@4
Pass@4
Avg@4
Pass@4
No Intervention
26.46
44.17
16.75
34.95
49.50
65.00
Steering w/ RL
36.32
59.71
23.79
39.81
49.50
72.00
Table 2: Results on out-of-domain benchmarks with an online search API. We report mean (Avg@4) and best-of-n (Pass@4) accuracy across 4 random seeds. Best results are in bold.
Figure 4: F1 improvement as the intervention frequency varies. By adjusting the fast path threshold without retraining, RL steering maintains the largest total gain (left) and the largest gain per intervention at low frequency (right), prioritizing the states that influence the final outcome most.
Appendix figures & tables3 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Figure 5: In-domain gains under varied rollout hyperparameters. Each configuration is labelled by (m,k,G,N) , the number of selection rounds, states per round, steering actions per state, and continuations per branch. Δ F1 is the paired gain in mean F1 over the seven benchmarks against the no-intervention baseline.
Figure 6: Average latency per call of the fast and slow paths. The two paths share the same prefill cost, and the cost of the slow path comes from generating the reasoning and steering action.
Method
Multi-Hop QA
Single-Hop QA
Overall
2Wiki
Hotpot
Bamboogle
MuSiQue
NQ
Trivia
Pop
Avg.
Δ
No Intervention
44.6
55.7
38.4
17.0
53.7
72.8
47.4
47.09
–
Planning
44.6
53.8
48.0
20.4
55.2
74.7
49.3
49.43
+2.34
w/ RL
48.4
53.5
45.6
18.8
52.0
72.4
47.4
48.30
+1.21
Verification
42.8
52.2
45.6
16.2
50.8
74.2
43.0
46.40
−0.69
w/ RL
43.1
55.1
42.4
19.7
56.3
71.7
47.7
48.00
+0.91
Appendix
Table 5: LLM-as-a-Judge results on in-domain benchmarks. The methods and predictions are the same as in Table 1 , and Δ is the gain in Avg. over No Intervention. Best results are in bold.
Steering an LLM agent means deciding whether to correct it, at which step, and with which mechanism. Uncertainty is often used to decide when to correct an agent, but whether it can guide these decisions remains unclear. We steer agent trajectories separately at every non-terminal step with each of four mechanisms and run each continuation to completion. The resulting stepwise outcome table (SOT) holds about 82,000 counterfactual continuations of 1,864 trajectories from three benchmarks and two agents. It shows that uncertainty can identify failing trajectories, but that no single signal reliably locates the step at which steering helps. We therefore propose VoS (Value of Steering), a trajectory-level monitor, offline or online, that learns from SOT the value of steering at each step and decides where to steer by it. A harm-budgeted trigger decides whether to steer, limiting the fraction of successful trajectories that VoS disturbs. VoS improves on unmodified execution in all 12 settings of benchmark, agent, and offline or online use, by 7.8 points on average, and outperforms the strongest of five existing uncertainty-triggered methods in 11, by 2.9 points on average. Ablations show that training on measured outcomes and a tight harm budget are both essential.
Hanwen Li, Jinhao Duan, Guanhua Zhu +4
New Jersey Institute of Technology · University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · University of California, Irvine +1
Multi-agent large language model (LLM) systems enable complex, long-horizon reasoning by composing specialized agents, but practical deployment remains hindered by inefficient routing, noisy feedback, and high interaction cost. We introduce REDEREF, a lightweight and training-free controller for multi-agent LLM collaboration that improves routing efficiency during recursive delegation. REDEREF integrates (i) belief-guided delegation via Thompson sampling to prioritize agents with historically positive marginal contributions, (ii) reflection-driven re-routing using a calibrated LLM or programmatic judge, (iii) evidence-based selection rather than output averaging, and (iv) memory-aware priors to reduce cold-start inefficiency. Across multi-agent split-knowledge tasks, we show that while recursive retry alone saturates task success, belief-guided routing reduces token usage by 28%, agent calls by 17%, and time-to-success by 19% compared to random recursive delegation, and adapts gracefully under agent or judge degradation. These results demonstrate that simple, interpretable probabilistic control can meaningfully improve the efficiency and robustness of multi-agent LLM systems without training or fine-tuning.
Mohammad Parsa Hosseini, Ankit Shah, Saiyra Qureshi +3
A central goal of large language model (LLM) research is to build agentic systems that can plan, act, and adapt through sustained interaction with dynamic environments. While recent LLM-based agents exhibit impressive contextual reasoning, their long-horizon decision-making remains fragile, often suffering from objective drift, where goals and plans drift over extended interactions. We introduce Multi2, a hierarchical multi-agent decision-making framework that explicitly decomposes agent behavior into complementary roles. A high-level agent (System 1) focuses on context-aware sub-goal generation using supervised fine-tuning (SFT), while a low-level agent (System 2) executes atomic actions through offline-to-online reinforcement learning (RL) in interactive environments. This separation enables stable long-horizon control, mitigates objective drift, and allows efficient adaptation. Across diverse interactive environments, Multi2 consistently outperforms strong agentic baselines, demonstrating improved robustness and coordination in multi-turn interaction. Beyond performance, we introduce and release three hierarchical benchmark datasets, filling a long-standing gap in training and evaluating hierarchical decision-making for LLM-based agents.
Sangeun Park, Minhae Kwon
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Sungkyunkwan University, Republic of Korea.