Task Structure and Scalability in Multi-Robot Authoring

Multi-agent systems promise a new axis for scaling inference: rather than having one agent think longer or sample more attempts, a task is split across many agents that work in parallel and coordinate. However, in practice, more agents can easily produce duplicate work, coordination failures, and higher costs. We therefore formulate team design as a compute allocation problem: starting from a solo agent, where should additional inference compute go to reach the reward-cost Pareto frontier? We build a minimal multi-agent harness from the ground up and trace this frontier by varying, one at a time, the workflow stage at which a lead delegates to its workers (planning, implementation, or verification), the models that form the team, and the number of workers. On ProgramBench, teams outperform solo agents but cost three to seven times as much. With the right compute allocation, however, a heterogeneous 17-agent team comes within 1.4 points of a strong homogeneous 5-agent team at 70% lower cost. This efficiency stems from three findings. First, planning is the most valuable use of workers: in a homogeneous team whose lead decides how many workers to spawn, a lead that delegates only planning to its workers, and then implements and verifies the code itself, matches the reward of a lead that delegates to workers throughout planning, implementation, and verification, at half the cost. Second, cheap models pay off as planners but not as implementers: a strong lead with cheap planners recovers 47.5% of the reward gain of an all-strong team for only 13.9% of its additional cost, whereas cheap implementers lower reward. Third, planners keep improving reward as the team grows, whereas implementers and verifiers plateau beyond four workers. Together, our results offer a guide to spending an agent budget where it counts, given the task, cost, and latency constraints a user has.

Coordinating heterogeneous multi-robot systems (MRS) for complex, long-horizon tasks requires both flexible high-level reasoning and efficient execution-time scheduling. Existing LLM-based approaches struggle to balance reasoning efficiency and execution flexibility. Flat sequential plans are efficient to generate but overlook parallel execution opportunities, while repeated LLM reasoning introduces high latency, and offline schedules may unnecessarily keep robots idle due to fixed execution orders. This paper presents OSDAG, a novel framework that resolves this trade-off by employing a Directed Acyclic Graph (DAG) as the central representation for multi-robot coordination, coupled with constraint-aware online scheduling. The LLM is typically invoked once as a semantic parser that decomposes a natural-language instruction into a dependency-annotated task graph encoding precedence relations, together with robot capability and resource-feasibility constraints. A lightweight online scheduler then dynamically dispatches dependency-ready tasks to their assigned robots as soon as they become idle, exposing available parallelism while preserving correctness. Experiments across five benchmark scenarios demonstrate that OSDAG achieves $5-15\times$ faster reasoning time than dialogue-based methods, reduces makespan by up to $38\%$ over sequential baselines, and maintains competitive success rates. Both simulation and real-world experiments on human-robot collaboration tasks validate the effectiveness and practicality of the proposed approach for efficient multi-robot coordination. The website and resources are available at http://thanhnguyencanh.github.io/LLM_DAG4MultiRobot

Most multi-robot task allocation methods rely on communication to resolve conflicts and reach consistent assignments. In environments with limited bandwidth, degraded infrastructure, or adversarial interference, existing approaches degrade sharply. We introduce a learning-based framework that achieves high-quality task allocation without any robot-to-robot communication. The key idea is that robots coordinate implicitly by predicting teammates' bids: if each robot can anticipate competition for a task, it can adjust its choices accordingly. Our method predicts bid distributions to correct systematic errors in analytical mean-field approximations. While analytical predictions assume idealized conditions (uniform distributions, known bid functions), our learned approach adapts to task clustering and spatial heterogeneity. Inspired by Smart Predict-then-Optimize (SPO), we train predictors end-to-end to minimize Task Allocation Regret rather than prediction error. To scale to large swarms, we develop a mean-field approximation where each robot predicts the distribution of competing bids rather than individual bids, reducing complexity from $O(NT)$ to $O(T)$. We call our approach FORMICA: Field-Oriented Regret-Minimizing Implicit Coordination Algorithm. Experiments show FORMICA substantially outperforms a natural analytical baseline. In scenarios with 16 robots and 64 tasks, our approach improves system reward by 17% and approaches the optimal MILP solution. When deployed on larger scenarios (256 robots, 4096 tasks), the same model improves performance by 7%, demonstrating strong generalization. Training requires only 21 seconds on a laptop, enabling rapid adaptation to new environments.