Mixture-of-Agents

Current Mixture-of-Agents (MoA) paradigms generally treat query routing and agent fine-tuning as separate processes, limiting their ability to respond to evolving agent capabilities. This disconnect prevents routing strategies from adapting to evolving agent capabilities during post-training and prevents agents from achieving synergistic data-driven specialization. To resolve this, we introduce CERA-MoA (Co-Evolving Router with continually learning Agents for Mixture-of-Agents), an iterative reinforcement learning framework where the dynamic router and independent agent policies co-evolve. We design a predictive familiarity estimator that leverages mid-layer hidden states to evaluate semantic competence among agents, avoiding the overhead of full rollouts. Based on these familiarity scores, a cumulative-threshold adaptive routing mechanism dynamically activates a tailored minimal agent subset, achieving a trade-off between task performance and efficiency. By proactively allocating targeted training samples to agents based on their evolving competence, CERA-MoA promotes capability differentiation. Extensive experiments across various domains demonstrate that CERA-MoA outperforms state-of-the-art static-agent routing and fix-workflow fine-tuning baselines.

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly applied to clinical prediction tasks such as in-hospital mortality and readmission from electronic health records (EHRs). Privacy and compliance constraints motivate systems that can be deployed locally, which has increased interest in open-weight multi-agent designs. However, most medical multi-agent systems are evaluated as a single block, leaving unclear which agent role contributes to prediction and whether retrieval drives observed gains. We study a role-specialized Mixture-of-Agents (MoA) that combines medical knowledge retrieval with contrastive similar-patient reasoning. By varying the role design while holding the retrieval setup fixed, we localize the main effect to the final integrator. Pairing large open-weight analysts with a small open-weight integrator matches closed-model prompting on F1 for mortality prediction while flagging substantially more true high-risk patients. Mechanism analysis shows the role assignment directly yields a high-recall operating point without threshold tuning. The effect is task-dependent, with smaller gains for readmission because the available records correlate weakly with this longer-horizon outcome. These results position role design as a key factor in privacy-constrained, training-free clinical LLM prediction.

Mixture-of-Agents (MoA) architectures improve inference-time scaling by organizing multiple LLM agents into layered reasoning pipelines. However, existing MoA variants fail to sustain gains as depth increases, exhibiting degradation, early plateauing, or saturation. We propose ReM-MoA, a memory-augmented MoA framework that sustains scaling through two mechanisms: (1) a Ranked Reasoning Memory that persistently stores and ranks reasoning traces from all layers using a comparative Reviewer Agent, and (2) a Curated Diversified Memory Routing scheme that exposes different agents to distinct combinations of successful and failed traces, preserving exploration diversity while propagating high-quality reasoning. We further introduce an optional multi-domain Reviewer distillation pipeline that improves ranking quality through frontier-model supervision. Across five reasoning benchmarks spanning math, formal logic, code, knowledge, and commonsense, ReM-MoA consistently outperforms prior MoA variants across both depth and width scaling, and its advantage widens with depth, establishing structured cross-layer reasoning memory as a key missing mechanism for scalable multi-agent inference.

Multi-Document Summarization (MDS) plays a critical role in distilling essential information from collections of textual data. Existing approaches often struggle to capture complex inter-document relationships, rely heavily on large amounts of labeled data for supervised training, or exhibit limited generalization across domains and languages. To address these limitations, we present a training-free mixture-of-agents framework for MDS that leverages the complementary strengths of large language models (LLMs) and knowledge graphs. Our approach decomposes summarization into specialized agent tasks: extractive selection, knowledge-aware abstraction, and iterative refinement, each operating without task-specific fine-tuning. We unify their outputs using a multi-perspective consistency mechanism guided by LLMs. Experiments across four datasets in English and Vietnamese demonstrate state-of-the-art or competitive performance, validating the effectiveness and adaptability of our modular design.

When multiple LLM agents solve the same problem, standard practice compresses each agent's reasoning into a majority vote or layered synthesis, treating agreement as the finish line. We show this is unnecessarily lossy: an LLM aggregator that reads complete reasoning traces recovers correct solutions even when agents unanimously agree, with beneficial corrections consistently outweighing harmful ones -- the aggregation paradox. Majority voting has a ceiling that perturbation diversity does not raise (error correlations are identical); the aggregator's gain comes from trace-level complementarity, assembling correct intermediate steps from minority chains that voting discards. These findings motivate Self-Consistent Mixture of Agents which generates trace diversity through semantic-preserving input perturbations, safeguards the majority via anchored refinement with provable non-degradation guarantees, and always synthesizes -- never gates on consensus. A single model with perturbation-induced trace variation outperforms heterogeneous model pools across structured reasoning, PhD-level science, competition mathematics, and competitive programming. The unit of aggregation should be the reasoning trace, not the answer.

The Mixture-of-Agents (MoA) framework has shown promise in improving large language model (LLM) performance by aggregating outputs from multiple agents. However, existing MoA systems often rely on static routers that do not fully capture temporal and contextual dependencies across aggregation layers. To address this limitation, we propose MMoA, a recurrent MoA architecture that integrates LSTM-based gating into the agent selection process. The recurrence router adaptively modulates agent contributions based on both current inputs and historical routing decisions, enabling more context-aware aggregation. We evaluate MMoA on standard instruction-following benchmarks, including AlpacaEval 2.0, MT-Bench, and Arena-Hard. The results show that MMoA achieves comparable accuracy to traditional MoA while reducing computational overhead by dynamically activating fewer agents. For example, on AlpacaEval 2.0, MMoA achieves a win rate of 58.0%, compared with 59.8% for MoA, while improving runtime efficiency by up to 4.6%. These results suggest that MMoA provides a scalable and efficient approach for adaptive multi-agent LLM systems.

Recent advances in Large Language Models (LLMs) have catalyzed the development of multi-agent systems (MAS) for complex reasoning tasks. However, existing MAS typically rely on pre-defined or pre-compiled communication topologies, which limits their flexibility and adaptability to dynamic task requirements. In this work, we propose Differentiable Mixture-of-Agents (DMoA), a self-evolving multi-agent framework that enables elastic and adaptive agent collaboration during inference. Instead of statically constructing workflows, DMoA dynamically routes and activates agents at each reasoning step, allowing the system to implicitly simulate diverse communication topologies and adapt to evolving demands. To achieve this, we design a differentiable, context-aware routing mechanism that leverages recurrent structures to incorporate historical and contextual information, producing sparse agent activations in a step-wise manner. Furthermore, we introduce predictive entropy as self-supervised signals to optimize the routing process, enabling efficient test-time adaptation without external annotations. Extensive experiments across 9 benchmarks demonstrate that DMoA achieves state-of-the-art performance while exhibiting strong efficiency, robustness, and ensembling capabilities.

Modeling latent clinical constructs from unconstrained clinical interactions is a unique challenge in affective computing. We present ADAPTS (Agentic Decomposition for Automated Protocol-agnostic Tracking of Symptoms), a framework for automated rating of depression and anxiety severity using a mixture-of-agents LLM architecture. This approach decomposes long-form clinical interviews into symptom-specific reasoning tasks, producing auditable justifications while preserving temporal and speaker alignment. Generalization was evaluated across two independent datasets ($N=204$) with distinct interview structures. On high-discrepancy interviews, automated ratings approximated expert benchmarks ($\text{absolute error}=22$) more closely than original human ratings ($\text{absolute error}=26$). Implementing an ``extended'' protocol that incorporates qualitative clinical conventions significantly stabilized ratings, with absolute agreement reaching $\text{ICC(2,1)} = 0.877$. These findings suggest that the ADAPTS framework enables promising evaluations of psychiatric severity. While the current implementation is purely text-based, the underlying architecture is readily extensible to multimodal inputs, including acoustic and visual features. By approximating expert-level precision in a protocol-agnostic manner, this framework provides a foundation for objective and scalable psychiatric assessment, especially in resource-limited settings.

Interactive task planning with large language models (LLMs) lets robots generate high-level action plans from natural language, but over long horizons it asks many questions, and tabular plan representations become hard to manage. We propose a framework that integrates Mixture-of-Agents (MoA)-based proxy answering into interactive planning and generates Behavior Trees (BTs) for structured long-term execution. We formulate the MoA as an abstention-based delegation cascade: each expert agent answers only the questions entailed by its own prerequisite description, forwards the rest unchanged, and the human user acts as the terminal fallback. The question set is thus partitioned disjointly, so no answer fusion or arbitration is required while every question is still resolved. The BT represents task logic hierarchically and enables retry and dynamic switching among robot policies. Experiments on a cocktail-making task show that the method removes approximately 27% of the human responses while keeping the generated BTs within the baseline generator's own variance. Real-robot experiments on a smoothie-making task further demonstrate successful long-horizon execution with adaptive policy switching and recovery from action failures. We further analyze the failure modes of the framework and show that its applicability boundary is set by the reliability of the weakest action node rather than by the planner. These results indicate that MoA-assisted interactive planning improves dialogue efficiency while preserving execution quality in real-world robotic tasks.