Multi-Agent Coordination

Anchor and Perturb (AnP) is a lightweight framework that resolves multi-agent coordination failures by decoupling exploratory variance injection from recurrent manifold stability. Existing remediation strategies predominantly alter mixing network architectures or enforce simultaneous exploration across the collective, which inevitably precipitates severe temporal-difference penalties in non-monotonic reward spaces. Specifically, AnP isolates underperforming lazy agents and injects an asymmetric exploratory pulse into targeted coordinates whilst anchoring converged teammates to nominal greedy exploitation. Empirical telemetry benchmarks demonstrate that AnP successfully rescues collapsed joint policies (recovering from a 5% evaluation win rate nadir back to 85%) and facilitates escape from suboptimal coordination plateaus, sustaining peak win rates of 90% without requiring structural network modifications.

In multi-agent environments, coordinating agents to prevent interference and ensure robust individual performance is a critical challenge. Previous research on social laws for multi-agent systems has primarily focused on deterministic, goal-based settings. This paper extends the concept of social laws to stochastic, reward-based environments, proposing a formalism for defining and verifying their robustness under various conditions. We introduce the notion of $α$-robustness, a measure of the guaranteed utility each agent retains while pursuing its optimal single agent policy, assuming all agents obey the social law. We then present an approach for robustness verification of social laws in stochastic settings, based on a reduction to solving a series of Markov decision processes. Empirical evaluations on toy environments illustrate the potential of our framework.

Between 24 May and 2 July 2026, autonomous language-model agents running inside a timed research-question evaluation wrote to a third party's public, world-writable wiki. OpenAI acknowledged the incident; independent researchers reconstructed it and published the wiki's archived revision history. We analyse that history (14,591 revisions, 3,103 names, 4,579 pages, 19,913 server events) as a behavioural record, attributing text to the revision that added it rather than to cumulative page content. Under an explicit identity model we reconstruct 907 cohorts and, from a random calendar marker the environment attached to each episode, estimate about 876 episodes (95% interval 774-995; alternative reconstructions span 800-1400). Coordination formats converged within a day, and the schedules created large opportunities for information asymmetry: because episodes of the same question chain ran at different internal-clock rates and started up to 16 h apart, the first report of an item preceded a later cohort's arrival by a median of 3.4 h. The three schedule parameters agents reported share one latent speed scale (78% of log-variance over 15 configurations), and in one task family the last observed activity clusters by reported speed class on the internal clock, compatible with a fixed internal-time horizon. Across the 510 cohorts with an observable, format-dependent progress trace, we find no robust positive association between measured coordination and documented progress, including the few demonstrably given a future answer. Because the export contains neither successful-read logs, harness messages nor ground-truth outcomes, these results do not identify the causal origin of the coordination or its effect. We report four claims from our earlier analysis that did not survive re-examination, and argue that read and outcome logging are requirements for agent-evaluation environments.

This work considers multi-agent coordination with arbitrary information networks among the agents using a game-theoretic approach. A system designer aims to assign local utility functions to the agents to guide their actions toward a desired system objective. The performance of the assigned local utilities is measured by the well known pure price of anarchy (pPoA) metric that equals the ratio of the system objective at the worst pure Nash equilibrium of the corresponding game to the optimal system objective. Our aim is to derive the utility functions which optimize the pPoA-based performance guarantees for any given information network and system objective. We develop a linear program that derives the optimal pPoA for any arbitrary information network and arbitrary system objective. Our work is the first to solve optimal utility design for arbitrary networks; our techniques generalize previous approaches which considered only the full-information setting. For supermodular objective functions, we prove that counterintuitively, a fully communication-denied utility design is optimal irrespective of the original information network. For submodular system objectives, an exhaustive numerical analysis suggests that the optimal utility design is robust to communication failures even for this case. When the system objective is weighted maximum coverage, the marginal contribution utility design provably optimizes the pPoA for a wide variety of information networks of interest.

Multi-agent robotic manipulation tasks require coordination among agents to satisfy task-level temporal, logical, and safety constraints. Recently, diffusion policies have been used to perform the task. However, they still suffer from desynchronization, incorrect action ordering, and coordination failures in tasks that require simultaneous or sequential multi-agent interaction. Therefore, LTLDiff is proposed as a framework that combines Finite Linear Temporal Logic (LTLf) specification learning for both the generation of demonstrations and learning via diffusion policies. Each task has a specific LTLf formula that is learned from a set of natural language instructions using a large-scale language model. To enable a fixed-dimensional vector embedding of the learned specification from the language model, LTLf uses an abstract syntax tree representation scheme. This embedding of logic serves as a condition for (i) logic-guided data collection and (ii) diffusion-based policy training, encouraging trajectories that are consistent with the desired ordering and coordination requirements. Experiments on multi-agent LTLDiff manipulation tasks demonstrate improved task success rates compared to the baseline. Together, these contributions demonstrate the effectiveness of LTLDiff for coordinated multi-agent manipulation.

We present Multi-Agent Reasoning and Coordination (MARC), an open-source framework that replaces monolithic LLM prompting with deterministic multi-agent orchestration for clinical reasoning. MARC coordinates role-specialized agents for extraction, reasoning, answer generation, and evaluation, with explicit context passing and traceable intermediate outputs, enabling stage-wise failure attribution. We additionally introduce a Decomposer module that generates task-specific agent prompts from a plain-language description, eliminating manual prompt engineering. The framework supports both API-based and local CPU-compatible deployments and is entirely configurable via YAML, without code modifications. MARC is designed to be model-agnostic, interpretable, and accessible to clinical domain experts without programming expertise. The full framework is available at https://github.com/Penn-RAIL/MARC-v1.

Our results show that the existence of a short high-utility protocol already suffices for efficient communication. In particular, in a game with $n$ possible observations and $m$ actions: (1) For any achievable target utility $α$, we give an algorithm with $\mathrm{poly}(n, m, 1/ε)$ runtime that designs a protocol achieving utility at least $α-ε$ using only $2^{\mathcal O(CC_α(G))}/ε^2$ bits of communication. Here, $CC_α(G)$ is the minimum number of bits used by any protocol, even a computationally inefficient one, to achieve utility $α$. (2) We prove that this exponential dependence on $CC_α(G)$ is tight up to a constant. That is, unless $\mathrm P=\mathrm{NP}$, no polynomial-time algorithm can in general find optimal protocols using fewer than $2^{CC_α(G) -2}$ bits. We note that our results strictly weaken the assumptions required by prior work in the multi-agent information aggregation literature, filling a gap that had remained elusive even for games with constant $CC_α(G)$. In particular, prior guarantees for agreement-based information aggregation rely on structural assumptions such as informational substitutes or weak learnability. We show that these assumptions already imply $CC_α(G) = O(1)$ and are therefore more restrictive conditions than required by our protocol to succeed. On a technical level, our results involve a novel strengthening of the Frieze-Kannan weak regularity lemma and yield the following powerful polynomial-time transformation tool: for every communication game $G$, it constructs a game $\hat G$ that is a coarsening of the agents' observation spaces into constant-size partitions, such that $G$ and $\hat G$ are indistinguishable with respect to every short communication protocol. This coarsening theorem is the engine behind our algorithm and may be of independent interest.

AI agents deployed in real-world settings must be capable of coordinating with humans and other AI agents they have not encountered before. Zero-shot coordination (ZSC) algorithms aim to achieve this by specifying high-level learning rules such that independently engineered agents can coordinate with each other at test time. Rigorous evaluation of ZSC algorithms remains difficult: ideally, multiple independent implementations of each proposed algorithm must be used, reflecting the variation that arises when independent parties interpret and implement the same specification. In practice, however, ZSC algorithms have almost exclusively been evaluated using a single implementation trained across different random seeds, with only a handful of works additionally varying the neural network architecture. This leaves open questions about robustness to specification ambiguities and implementation details. In this work, we provide the first systematic evaluation of this robustness. We introduce a new evaluation scheme, cross-implementation cross-play, varying implementation details that prior work has shown to affect the performance of multi-agent reinforcement learning (MARL) algorithms, and we evaluate Other-Play, a popular ZSC algorithm, with this scheme. Our findings are encouraging and suggest that, for Other-Play, the standard ZSC evaluation is, in fact, a reasonable proxy for this more thorough cross-implementation evaluation.

Traditional distributed consensus protocols classify nodes as either honest-but-faulty or actively malicious (Byzantine). However, in organizational structures, departmental agents rarely fit this binary. Instead, they exhibit bounded rationality and self-interested preferences while operating under asymmetric information. This paper presents the Organizational Consensus Algorithm (OCA), a mechanism design framework tailored for internal negotiation and decision coordination. OCA models inter-departmental conflict as an incomplete information dynamic game, integrating internal token staking, an exception-triggered challenge mechanism, and confidence-weighted consensus rules. Rather than enforcing instantaneous total ordering, OCA leverages a retrospective penalty system driven by delayed verifiable outcomes to deter structural bias and reduce exhaustive coordination overhead. A Python simulation prototype was developed to evaluate OCA. Across independent trials with varying organizational scales, OCA reports lower coordination overhead, higher informative reporting rates, and bounded welfare loss in noisy environments. Crucially, these results remain conditional on the stated simulation model and do not by themselves establish a general truthful equilibrium.

Concurrent games are a standard model for multi-agent systems, with Nash equilibrium as their central solution concept. The associated \emph{constrained existence problem}---does a game admit a Nash equilibrium whose expected payoff lies within a prescribed interval for every player?---is undecidable, and remains so even for 10-player \emph{stopping} games, in which a terminal state is reached almost surely under every strategy profile. We give two routes to tractability. We first relax exactness and consider the problem of approximate constrained existence problem, parametrised by $\varepsilon$-NE, which decides whether an $\varepsilon$-Nash equilibrium with the prescribed payoffs exists. The algorithm runs in exponential time, and only polynomially in the bit-size of $\varepsilon$. We complement it with a \PSPACE-hardness lower bound that holds already for turn-based games, and for pure equilibria as well. We then relax the solution concept, turning to \emph{extreme risk-sensitive equilibria} (XRSE), recently introduced for turn-based stochastic games. Here the players are partitioned into optimists and pessimists, who evaluate a strategy profile by the best, respectively the worst, payoff attainable with positive probability, instead of the expected payoff. We prove that the constrained existence problem for XRSE is \NP-complete on concurrent games, as for turn-based games.

Distributed coordination of multi-agent systems frequently relies on cooperative protocols designed to achieve agreement on a prescribed, non-trivial trajectory. While the robustness of such protocols to various uncertainties is well documented, existing literature universally assumes that the target agreement trajectory itself remains invariant. This assumption may hold in ideal cases, but we prove that network perturbations can vastly modify the asymptotic agreement trajectory. We first investigate the exact trajectories of Linear Time-Invariant (LTI) agents subjected to dynamic coupling uncertainties by establishing a new Laplace-domain criterion that characterizes the specific closed-loop poles governing the perturbed agreement manifold. To formalize our analysis, we introduce the notion of structure-preserving dynamics, perturbations that maintain the null space of the communication graph's Laplacian, and contrast them with transmission only dynamics, affecting only the adjacency matrix. We prove a critical fragility within standard cooperative output regulation schemes: while static consensus is uniquely robust to heterogeneous transmission delays, synchronization to periodic trajectories is destroyed by arbitrarily small transmission delays. Furthermore, we demonstrate that for d-regular topologies, uniform transmission perturbations can easily shift the system to synchronize with an unexpected, entirely new frequency. These findings expose a previously unidentified vulnerability in classical robust synchronization, demonstrating that transmission dynamics necessitate fundamental structural modifications to networked reference generators.

Robust multi-agent coordination relies heavily on inter-agent communication, which is frequently disrupted by physical and environmental constraints in real-world deployments. To maintain operation during these intermittent communication failures, agents can employ internal prediction models to estimate missing shared state information. However, predictors trained with standard reconstruction objectives treat all transitions equally. In a Reinforcement Learning context, this forces the model to waste capacity learning stochastic exploration noise and the outdated dynamics of suboptimal policies. In this paper, we propose a value-aware extension of Multi-Agent Observation Sharing under Communication Dropout (MARO) to patch communication gaps; we refer to this method as Value-Aware MARO. By dynamically weighting the predictor's loss function using advantage estimates derived from the underlying actor-critic architecture, our objective explicitly couples the predictor's learning process to the policy's evolution. This formulation focuses the model's capacity on the intentional, high-return dynamics actively reinforced by the agents. We evaluate our framework on several tasks within the Multi-Agent Particle Environment under varying communication reliability levels. Experimental results demonstrate that our approach maintains performance under declining communication reliability, particularly below 40%. While our method performs comparably in tasks where the baseline already maintains high coordination, our value-aware weighting effectively prevents the performance collapse observed in the standard predictor during high-attrition scenarios. In these environments, our method achieves an average improvement in mean returns of more than 20% and reduces performance variance by a mean of 64.7% compared to the standard unweighted baseline.

The problem of fair multi-agent coordination in decentralized settings is one of the most pressing challenges for building efficient collaborative systems. Resource allocation is based on optimized collective arrangements accounting for agents' needs. Such coordination should not only be computationally efficient but also account for fairness, i.e., equitable redistribution of costs incurred by all agents. Recent literature has proposed several algorithms that efficiently determine optimal plan combinations balancing system-wide efficiency and individual discomfort of agents in a centralized setting. However, these works do not address equitable resource optimization in fully decentralized scenarios, specifically, the optimized redistribution of discomfort among coordinating agents so that none experiences a discomfort level that could lead to loss of incentive or polarization that can disrupt planned operations. In this work, we study the problem of optimizing three objectives: (i) system-wide efficiency, (ii) individuals' comfort and (iii) fairness (i.e., balancing of incurred discomfort costs) in decentralized multi-agent coordination. We design a novel model to optimize those three orthogonal objectives, without any substantial increase in communication and computational overhead. Through experiments on two real-world datasets, we validate the model and demonstrate that it can achieve fairer optimization outcomes, while satisfying agents' preferences and system goals.

Embodied agent teams powered by heterogeneous large language models (LLMs) are being widely deployed in physical artificial intelligence such as smart factories, warehouses, and service robotics. To enable collaboration among such an agent team, efficient coordination mechanisms that operate reliably under limited network resources are required. However, existing heterogeneous LLM-agent coordination frameworks that rely on multi-round natural-language-based conversations introduce three coupled challenges. First, inter-agent dialogue incurs communication overhead that grows rapidly with team size. Second, the quality of coordination is constrained by the heterogeneous capabilities of the agent team's LLMs. Third, agents may suffer from action delays due to iterative negotiation. To address these challenges, we propose LDT-Coord, a networked coordination framework built upon a lightweight digital twin (DT). Specifically, each agent independently selects its intended action and reports both the action decision and a structured temporal constraint over shared resources to the DT server, thereby decoupling coordination performance from natural-language reasoning ability. Then, DT executes a training-free, rule-based orchestrator algorithm to resolve cross-agent conflicts and returns coordination instructions to prevent such conflicts. To further reduce communication overhead, we formulate agent reporting control as a constrained partially observable Markov decision process (C-POMDP) and solve it with the PPO-Lagrangian algorithm. Simulation results show that LDT-Coord achieves a task success rate comparable to conventional coordination methods while reducing communication overhead by more than 70x and maintaining robustness under LLM heterogeneity.

Large language model (LLM) agents are increasingly evaluated on their ability to use tools, plan multi-step tasks, coordinate with other agents, and operate over extended horizons. Reported benchmark gains often obscure recurring failure modes documented across otherwise unrelated evaluation efforts. This paper synthesizes 27 benchmark, taxonomy, and audit papers (2023-2026), spanning 19 distinct benchmarks, into a cross-cutting taxonomy of agent limitations. To our knowledge, this is the first synthesis that integrates evidence across tool use, planning, long-horizon reasoning, multi-agent coordination, safety, and measurement validity into a single, unified taxonomy of LLM agent limitations. We identify six failure clusters: (1) tool invocation and parameter-level errors, (2) planning and constraint-satisfaction failures, (3) long-horizon degradation from context accumulation, (4) multi-agent coordination failures, (5) safety and security failures under adversarial or underspecified conditions, and (6) measurement validity problems. The taxonomy was derived iteratively by grouping independently reported error categories into themes corresponding to distinct stages of the agent reasoning-to-action pipeline. Across the literature, we find that failures compound nonlinearly with task length, that strong performance on individual sub-tasks does not reliably translate into end-to-end success, and that additional scaffolding does not consistently improve reliability. At the same time, substantial progress has been demonstrated in single-turn tool use, short-horizon web navigation, and narrowly scoped coding tasks.

Distributed trajectory estimation arises in many applications across robotics, but existing implementations typically do not consider asynchrony in agents' communications and computations. Therefore, we propose an asynchronous block coordinate descent algorithm for distributed trajectory estimation. We consider a team of agents that observes a team of robots and estimates the robots' states over a sliding window. The agents solve an approximation of the maximum a posteriori estimation problem, which we derive. We show this approximation introduces negligible errors and eliminates up to 96.9% of communications among agents. Next, we prove that agents' iterates converge exponentially fast to the optimal estimate of the robots' states. Simulations show that this approach has up to 64% less error than a comparable state-of-the-art algorithm. Experiments on mobile robots show this approach is robust to delays whose lengths span three orders of magnitude.

Multi-arm manipulation demands precise spatiotemporal coordination, yet many centralized approaches scale poorly as team size increases. To address this, we propose CLS-DP, a decentralized multi-agent framework that enables implicit coordination under partial observability without shared global views, explicit state information, or inter-agent communication. Under the centralized training and decentralized execution (CTDE) paradigm, CLS-DP distills privileged multi-agent dynamics into a latent space. At deployment, each agent infers a collaborative latent from its local RGB observation and a shared task instruction; it then conditions the diffusion denoising process on this latent. This design enables implicit coordination with a per-agent cost independent of team size. Across six RoboFactory benchmark tasks spanning two to four agents, CLS-DP achieves a 38% mean success rate, outperforming the best centralized baseline (20%) and a decentralized ablation without the collaborative latent (9%). It also maintains superior parameter efficiency across all agent configurations. Attribution maps show that an agent conditioned on the collaborative latent places high attribution on the joints and grippers of both itself and its teammates throughout execution. This suggests that the learned latent efficiently encodes collaborative dynamics from local observation, which facilitates implicit coordination in realistic settings characterized by partial observability.

Multi-Agent Path Finding (MAPF) is a problem that requires computing collision-free paths for a set of agents from their start locations to designated goal locations. The problem has broad applications in domains where teams of robots must operate in a coordinated manner. ORCA* is a real time MAPF solver that assigns for each timestep a velocity for each agent. Due to its real time nature, it is myopic to future deadlocks that result from current decisions. ORCA*-MAPF attempts to remedy this limitation by introducing fallback mechanisms when deadlocks are detected. However, post hoc interventions often introduce significant flowtime overhead. In this paper, we introduce C-ORCA* and C-ORCA*-MAPF, continuous space MAPF algorithms that incorporate agents' entire spatial trajectory and their spatial dependencies to proactively prevent deadlocks from occurring, thus avoiding the high flowtime overhead associated with post hoc corrections in ORCA*-MAPF. The C-ORCA* family of algorithms significantly outperform previous state-of-the-art in terms of solve rate, runtime, and flowtime.

Distributed optimization is a highly scalable and structurally transparent technique to solve multi-agent robotics problems; however, such methods often suffer from the need for highly-specialized, problem-specific hyperparameter tunings. In this work, we propose Deep Coordinator, a deep-unfolding framework that learns to dynamically adjust the hyperparameters of ADMM-DDP, a popular distributed solver for robotics tasks, at solve-time in response to optimizer performance. Our architecture consists of unrolling a fixed number of ADMM-DDP iterations into a neural network with learnable functions between layers mapping the optimizer state to the next hyperparameters. To the best of our knowledge, Deep Coordinator is the first deep-unfolding framework to adapt the penalty parameters of a non-convex optimizer at solve-time; we show that the mainstream supervised approach can yield degenerate solutions when training such models, and propose an unsupervised learning scheme. On simulations with fleets of cars and quadrotors, Deep Coordinator produces trajectories of comparable quality 6.18-9.44x faster than conventional solvers. Furthermore, Deep Coordinator retains its performance benefits when deployed to systems up to 8x larger than trained on.

Autonomous coding agents now open millions of pull requests, yet large-scale studies find their PRs are produced faster but accepted less often - a coordination and trust gap that pull-request-level telemetry cannot explain. We argue the missing signal lives before the PR, in how concurrent agents claim, divide, and collide over shared work. We study this process through grite, our open-source coordination substrate that needs no central server and stores its records inside git itself, so its append-only, signed event log captures the coordination process directly. We show that (i) this shared substrate reduces duplicate and conflicting work at bounded overhead - the share of work that merely re-does a teammate's task falls from 78% to 0% while useful throughput more than triples; (ii) every agent's copy of the log converges to the same state with no write silently dropped, where a file-based tracker loses concurrent writes; and (iii) the log is a mineable artefact from which concrete failure modes - conflicting edits, lock starvation, redundant rediscovery, race-to-close - are automatically recoverable with provenance, several invisible in pull-request history. We release the dataset, harness, and mining toolkit.

Modern Vision-Language Models (VLMs) often struggle with strategic reasoning, i.e., anticipating and influencing other agents' actions, under uncertainty in competitive and cooperative settings. Real-time strategy (RTS) games can be a natural testbed for diagnosing this limitation, as they demand coordination with allies, adaptation to opponents' strategy, and long-horizon planning under partial observability. However, existing RTS benchmarks offer limited evaluation scope, lack systematic competency diagnosis, and remain fixed in the pre-designed scenario coverage. To address these limitations, we present RTSGameBench, which is built on Beyond All Reason, a large-scale RTS game with an expanded battlefield that demands broader strategy diversity than the existing testbeds. The proposed benchmark provides evaluations through diverse gameplay across various matchup structures, diagnostic assessment via mini-games, each targeting an individual strategic competency, and extensible coverage via a self-evolving generation framework that converts free-form queries into new mini-games, improving over successive cycles. Additionally, for VLMs to operate in large-scale RTS games, we provide RTSGameAgent that manages units by an FSM with agentic memory. We empirically validate that multiple state-of-the-art VLMs do not perform well when matchups demand tighter coordination, multiagent coordination and when task scale increases.

Large language models (LLMs) remain limited in multi-agent planning because independently generated plans can create coordination failures such as spatial collisions, resource contention, and temporal deadlocks. We introduce Tensor-Coord, a multilinear algebra framework that represents the joint plan of N agents as a third-order tensor $T \in R^{N \times H \times A}$ over agents, timesteps, and actions. Canonical Polyadic (CP) and Tucker decompositions are used to identify latent coordination structure. The minimal epsilon-approximate CP rank R* defines a computable coordination complexity measure, with $CC(Pi)=(R*-N)/N$. We prove that R*=N is necessary and sufficient for plan independence. The residual $E=T-T_{R*}$ defines a conflict score over agent pairs, timesteps, and actions, localizing failures without domain-specific rules. Tucker factors provide interpretable agent roles, temporal phases, and action clusters that are converted into natural language constraints for iterative LLM replanning. Experiments on multi-robot delivery tasks across Easy (2 agents, 5x5 grid), Medium (3 agents, 5x5 grid), and Hard (4 agents, 5x5 grid) settings show convergence to conflict-free plans in 100% of 2-agent cases within 1.4 iterations on average, 80% of 3-agent cases within 3.2 iterations, and 60% of 4-agent cases within 4.0 iterations. CP rank scaled approximately linearly as $R*(N) = 3.9N + 0.5$, supporting its use as a predictor of coordination complexity.

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

Spatial intelligence is a key frontier for multimodal large language models (MLLMs), enabling them to reason about the physical world from visual experience. Inspired by human spatial cognition, recent approaches construct grid-based cognitive maps from multi-frame visual inputs to maintain coherent spatial representations over time. However, limited context lengths still challenge spatial understanding, while existing methods, such as long-context modeling and external memory, often require architectural changes, memory modules, or finetuning, limiting their applicability to off-the-shelf pretrained MLLMs. This motivates a lightweight, model-agnostic method for preserving spatial information beyond the native context window. To this end, we propose a plug-and-play multi-agent framework that collaboratively constructs cognitive maps as structured spatial memory, enhancing the spatial understanding of arbitrary pretrained MLLMs without architectural modification or additional training. Our framework features local-global agent coordination, cognitive map construction with atomic commits, and cross-agent verification. Extensive experiments demonstrate that our method achieves superior performance on spatial understanding tasks while remaining fully training-free. Code will be released.

As language models are increasingly deployed as autonomous agents, they must coordinate with others over long horizons in open-ended interactive tasks. Yet existing evaluations rarely test these demands together, instead emphasising single-agent tasks, short interactions, or highly structured multi-agent settings. We introduce $alem$, a JAX-based benchmark for open-ended multi-agent coordination built on Craftax-like dynamics. Alem embeds procedurally generated coordination tasks, soft specialisation, communication, and controllable coordination difficulty into a long-horizon survival world with exploration, crafting, trading, and combat. We evaluate $13$ modern LLMs zero-shot within homogeneous teams, with trained MARL agents as reference points. Current LLM agents remain far from solving alem, averaging only ~6% normalised return, but their failures are not uniform. On the hardest coordination setting, zero-shot Gemini-3.1-Pro-High approaches MARL agents trained for one billion steps, while GPT-5.4-High achieves strong base-task reward but much lower coordination reward. This contrast shows that individual task competence does not imply coordination competence. Ablations show that communication is the largest contributor to coordination, while memory and reasoning help when used to maintain multi-step plans. Overall, our results identify coordination as a distinct bottleneck for frontier LLM agents, separate from single-agent capabilities. Alem makes this bottleneck measurable and provides a controlled testbed for developing agents that communicate, allocate roles, and execute shared plans. Code is available at https://github.com/alem-world/alem-env.

Agentic tutoring systems introduce a coordination challenge: multiple agents may propose different but reasonable interventions, yet only one response can be delivered to the learner. In this paper, we study how voting protocols shape cooperation among four role-constrained pedagogical agents responsible for scaffolding, misconception, motivation, and metacognition. We compare four voting protocols -- simple, ranked, cumulative, and approval voting -- across two simulated tutoring environments on SciQ and HumanEval benchmarks. Rather than using voting as a simple aggregation step, we use it to analyze how collective decision rules shape coordination under partial pedagogical conflict. Across 1,200 simulated interactions, we find that agent deliberation and voting protocol type frequently change which response ultimately wins, showing that both meaningfully shape the collective decision. Different voting rules also produce distinct coordination behaviors, and even brief tutoring turns show measurable learning gains in simulated students. Overall, we show that protocol choice is associated with distinct coordination patterns among role-specialized pedagogical agents.

We measure how well current large language models coordinate as multiple agents sharing a common resource, using the dining philosophers problem as a clean test bed. Across 630 episodes spanning seven models and three philosopher counts, four frontier closed-source systems reach mean reward 0.45 to 0.87 and Mistral-Small 24B reaches 0.83 to 0.99, while Qwen3-14B reaches 0.13 to 0.35. We then ask whether group relative policy optimization (GRPO) on rollouts from the task itself can close the gap and find that it cannot: a Welch's t-test on per-episode reward at five philosophers gives p = 0.66 and a Hedges' g of -0.11, with no statistically significant change at ten or fifteen philosophers either. Two further observations qualify the result. The training reward of both 8B and 14B runs peaked at step nine and then declined, so the default saved checkpoint at step 15 is strictly worse than several earlier ones. The four-term reward we use admits a degenerate maximum at zero actions, which DeepSeek-R1-Distill-Qwen-7B and Mistral-Small 24B at five philosophers both inhabit, with mean reward 1.0 and 0.83 respectively at zero meals. The bottleneck for an open-weight 14B model on multi-agent coordination is not training compute but training methodology: reward shaping that does not collapse to a no-action maximum, checkpoint discipline that does not depend on the final step, and curriculum across problem scales.

How much should an LLM agent remember, and how should multi-agent systems be connected when trying to reach consensus? We show these two design choices interact in a way that flips the sign of memory's effect on coordination. Across 432 simulation runs of a networked Naming Game on eight fixed 16-agent topologies, we vary memory depth and network structure. Longer memory slows the time to reach steady state in decentralized networks but accelerates it in centralized ones; the same parameter pushes the system in opposite directions depending on topology. Critically, "faster settling" in centralized networks means locking in to a fragmented plateau more quickly, not reaching system-wide consensus, which can be used to generate diverging opinions. We further document a memory-mediated speed-unity trade-off: centralized networks consistently preserve more competing conventions than decentralized networks, but their settling speed depends sharply on memory. At the agent level, within-network analyses show that high-betweenness bridges suffer a brokerage penalty while agents in locally clustered neighborhoods achieve higher coordination success. Finally, in search of analytically tractable generative mechanisms, we find that agents' choices are well captured by Fictitious Play, indicating belief-based rather than reward-based adaptation. The practical implication: memory depth and communication topology should be co-designed, not optimized in isolation.

Large language model (LLM)-based machine translation has advanced cross-cultural communication, yet it still struggles with culture-loaded words (CLWs) in ancient Chinese texts. The challenge extends beyond lexical alignment to deciding when and how culture-dependent knowledge should be explicated for readers lacking relevant background. Literal translation often preserves surface forms while missing underlying concepts, whereas over-explicitation harms conciseness and readability. To address this problem, we formulate CLW translation as a selective explicitation task and propose \textbf{MACAT}, a \textbf{M}ulti-\textbf{A}gent \textbf{C}ulture-\textbf{A}ware \textbf{T}ranslation framework that dynamically identifies culturally salient phrases and injects concise explanatory knowledge when necessary. MACAT further incorporates a quality-aware reranking module for candidate selection and a multi-round evaluation agent that assesses translations across terminological precision, readability, fidelity, cultural preservation, and cultural explicitation. Experiments on traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) classics and the \textit{Analects} show that, under a unified GPT-5.4 evaluation setting, MACAT consistently outperforms both the backbone model and general-purpose MT baselines on 100 TCM documents and a 20-chapter subset of the \textit{Analects}.

Enterprise multi-agent systems increasingly expose multiple coordination patterns, but deployments often lack evidence for when to use consensus, debate, synthesis, or a simpler single-agent workflow. This paper evaluates whether coordination strategy should be selected dynamically by problem class rather than fixed globally. We run a frozen matrix of 30 enterprise tasks spanning six industries, five problem classes, four execution conditions, three replications per cell, and four model arms: qwen_local, sonnet, gemma_openrouter, and an auxiliary openai cloud-validation arm. All 1,440 generated outputs are judged by a fixed Sonnet rubric. The main finding is bounded and operationally useful, but it is not the original strict H1. The pre-registered exact-winner/CI criterion is not supported: exact winner identity is unstable across model arms, and several predicted strategies are close to, but not above, the best observed alternative. A weaker near-best routing claim is strongly supported. In every pre-registered model arm and problem class, and again in the auxiliary OpenAI validation arm, the predicted strategy is within 0.10 quality-score points of the best observed condition. Structured compliance verification is the clearest exception to the original mapping: all arms favor single_agent rather than consensus. A pre-registered Kendall's W test finds no reliable difference between Vietnamese-domain and English-domain tasks in how consistently the four coordination conditions are ranked (mean W of 0.20 in both strata; signed-rank p = .85), so H2 is not supported. We conclude that enterprise coordination policy should use dynamic routing as a calibrated default, not as a deterministic winner-selection law.

We present a differentiable optimization framework for multi-agent coordination. An input is decomposed into overlapping local views, each processed by an agent that solves a convex subproblem parameterized by a neural encoder. Agents coordinate through the Alternating Direction Method of Multipliers (ADMM) with inter-agent constraints specified by a cellular sheaf. The sheaf specifies which aspects of neighboring solutions must agree, allowing for heterogeneous notions of global consensus. Backpropagating through the unrolled optimization jointly trains all components of the multi-agent system. We evaluate on maze pathfinding, image classification, and Sudoku, where agents with individually insufficient local views learn to coordinate to produce correct global outputs. On MNIST, the local-view decomposition yields improved robustness to distribution shifts relative to a standard CNN. On Sudoku, the optimization-derived structure yields markedly higher solve rates than parameter-matched MPNN baselines. Finally, the ADMM structure exposes distinct primal, consensus, and dual state variables, opening the coordination dynamics to direct analysis and intervention -- a property unavailable in standard message-passing architectures.

In many multi-agent applications, tasks yield rewards only when executed by a coalition meeting an unknown size threshold; otherwise, feedback is fully censored. This censorship creates an identifiability problem: agents cannot distinguish stochastic failure from insufficient coordination. We formalize this setting as the Threshold-Activated Cooperative Multi-Armed Bandit (TAC-MAB) and analyze it under both centralized and decentralized coordination. We show that a centralized algorithm (C-TAC) achieves cumulative regret O(log T), decomposed into a structural-search term that captures the cost of resolving feasibility under censored feedback and a statistical-monitoring term for value estimation. We then introduce D-TAC, a decentralized event-triggered protocol in which agents synchronize only when their structural beliefs change. Empirically, D-TAC achieves a 23x reduction in communication relative to the centralized baseline while preserving feasibility alignment under conservative belief fusion. These results characterize the coordination cost of learning under censored feedback and show that near-centralized communication efficiency is achievable without continuous synchronization.

In this work, we study Cooperative Spatial Intelligence, the ability of decentralized embodied agents to coordinate effectively under dynamic environmental constraints across city-scale outdoor domains. We introduce Sentinel Challenge, a benchmark where multiple decentralized embodied agents must communicate in natural language to agree on a mutually safe and convenient meeting point within large, city-scale outdoor environments. Each agent must then navigate safely while avoiding dynamic sentinels patrolling the area, using a tool that provides coarse spatial information. To address this, we propose CoSaR (Cooperative Spatial Reasoning and Planning), a framework that bridges the high-level communication and planning abilities of foundation models with the precision of classical spatial navigation algorithms. CoSaR enables agents to exchange situational updates, reason over evolving spatial constraints, and collaboratively replan trajectories. Evaluated across 14 city-level scenes with 3-5 agents, CoSaR consistently leads to faster gathering, shorter path lengths, and improved safety. Our results demonstrate that integrating dynamic communication with spatial reasoning is essential for robust multi-agent cooperation. By formalizing this new setting and providing a scalable benchmark, we aim to build a foundation for advancing cooperative spatial intelligence in embodied multi-agent systems. Code and challenge are available at https://github.com/UMass-Embodied-AGI/Sentinel.

As large language model (LLM)-based multi-agent systems scale to handle increasingly complex tasks, balancing structural stability and dynamic adaptability becomes increasingly challenging. Existing systems typically adopt either structure-centric methods, committing to structures determined upfront that limit fine-grained control, or orchestration-centric methods, adapting decisions dynamically while leaving coordination structure implicit and unstable. To address this challenge, we revisit multi-agent coordination from a probabilistic perspective, casting it as posterior inference over the joint distribution of structure and orchestration. We introduce MACA, an automated coordination framework that learns a task- and budget-conditioned structural prior over agent participation and interactions. This prior guides a policy-based orchestration as an approximation to posterior inference, enabling efficient solutions with fine-grained control. Across benchmarks, MACA outperforms adaptive multi-agent baselines by an average of 8.42% while using 43.19% fewer tokens. Further investigation reveals that joint adaptation of structure and orchestration suppresses redundant interactions, converging coordination toward task-effective execution.

Temporal knowledge-graph data marketplaces face three coupled failures in static designs: stale hybrid index shortcuts reduce recall as edges evolve, stationary Shapley pricing misattributes value after distribution shifts, and uncoordinated agents over-consume a shared differential-privacy budget. We present CHRONOS, a three-layer architecture providing a unified treatment of these challenges with explicit public and private separation. Layer one applies neural-ODE temporal decay to shortcut edges, providing a per-query expected recall-loss bound of Big-O of Pq lambda delta t, with a monotone-envelope guarantee reducing bound looseness to 1.8 to 3.2 times observed loss. Layer two conditions Shapley valuation on detected changepoints and provides finite-sample error guarantees under noise. Layer three uses EXP3-IX to achieve Big-O of the square root of T log T regret while enforcing epsilon and delta differential privacy via moments accounting. CHRONOS releases a privatized affinity matrix per epoch using the Gaussian mechanism; all retrieval and ranking are post-processing, incurring no extra privacy cost. We provide multi-epoch settlement, scalability analysis for 500 sellers, and comparisons against accelerated baselines. Across four benchmarks, CHRONOS shows 0.937 recall at ten, 2.74 queries per second, 161 ms latency, and total epsilon of 4.25 at delta of 10 to the power of negative 6 under zCDP composition. These results indicate a competitive operating point. A limitation is that at this privacy level, released valuations remain noise-dominated; utility derives primarily from public index routing and adaptive scheduling driven by low-sensitivity statistics.

This paper studies heterogeneous multi-team collaboration through dynamic robot allocation, where robots are treated as transferable resources. Leveraging Hamilton's rule from ecology as an altruistic decision-making mechanism, we propose a multi-team collaborative resource allocation framework with heterogeneous capabilities, transfer costs, and capability-dependent contributions. The resulting allocation problem is combinatorial and is shown to be NP-hard. To address scalability, we develop a graph neural network policy under centralized training and decentralized execution that approximates the altruistic allocations based on Hamilton's rule. The model operates over the team interaction graph and predicts robot-level transfer decisions and next robot-to-team assignments. The proposed approach is validated in a firefighting scenario through simulations and experiments, demonstrating that the learned policy achieves near-optimal performance while scaling to larger systems.

Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) operations are expected to significantly increase aerial traffic in urban airspace, requiring autonomous traffic management systems to ensure collision-free operations in highly congested environments. In this paper, we propose a multi-agent coordination framework that uses minimum time-to-reach (TTR) as a unifying metric for priority assignment, temporal separation, and safety filtering. We focus on the problem of coordinating multiple aerial vehicles merging into an air corridor while maintaining safe separation between vehicles. Vehicles are assigned arrival-consistent priority based on TTR, and target TTR values are used to enforce temporal spacing that induces spatial separation. A priority-consistent safety filtering layer based on Hamilton-Jacobi reachability value functions ensures collision avoidance while minimally modifying the reference guidance. Simulation results in a highly congested corridor merging scenario show that the proposed method improves safety, fairness, and efficiency compared to time-optimal guidance and priority-agnostic safety filtering.

Multi-robot systems are integral to modern logistics, but their capabilities are often limited to tasks executable by individual agents. This paper addresses a critical gap in existing frameworks like Multi-Agent Path Finding (MAPF) and Task Allocation and Path Finding (TAPF), which lack true cooperation for transporting large items that require multiple agents. To this end, we formalise the Cooperative Transportation Task Allocation and Path Finding (CT-TAPF) problem, which integrates team formation, task assignment, and collision-free pathfinding. We present an optimal solver, Cooperative Transportation Task Conflict-Based Search (CT-TCBS), which features a novel Incremental Expansion strategy to tackle the combinatorial explosion inherent in team formation. Recognising the computational cost of optimality, we also develop a family of sub-optimal solvers that employ a global, task-centric perspective, selecting the next task to assign based on a global difficulty metric (Best Task or Worst Task). Our comprehensive empirical evaluation demonstrates three key findings: (1) the incremental expansion strategy significantly outperforms the naive combinatorial approach by successfully pruning the dominant task-allocation search space; (2) we identify a task-conflict expansion dilemma, where sophisticated conflict resolvers effective for large-agent pathfinding subproblems can be detrimental in the integrated CT-TAPF setting; and (3) our proposed sub-optimal solvers establish a new, more efficient frontier on the solution quality-runtime spectrum compared to "nn-" agent-centric baselines. This work provides a foundational framework and a set of effective algorithms for a new, practical class of cooperative multi-agent problems.

While AI agents are rapidly advancing from isolated tools to interactive collaborators, data-driven human-machine teaming (HMT) methods remain costly in their reliance on human interaction data across domains, teammates, and team sizes. Zero-shot coordination (ZSC) addresses this bottleneck by simulating diverse partner populations to approximate how unseen partners might behave. However, partner coverage alone is insufficient as team settings scale and communication becomes degraded. To remedy this deficiency, we propose Influence-Based Team Steering (IBTS), a framework that uses influence shaping to incentivize agents to discover diverse, high-performing team interaction patterns and further steers ongoing trajectories toward stronger learned coordination modes. We assess IBTS on Overcooked-AI in both two-agent and three-agent settings, allowing us to test whether learned coordination structure transfers beyond dyadic interaction. Our evaluation includes simulated partners, synthetic partner-style variation, and, to our knowledge, the first 30-subject Overcooked-AI HMT study involving two real human teammates and one machine teammate. Across these evaluations, IBTS improves team performance against competing baselines, highlighting the need for scaled ZSC to combine sparse-reward coordination mechanisms with partner-variation coverage rather than relying on diversity alone.

A plethora real-world environments require agents to compete repeatedly for the same limited resource, calling for a temporal notion of fairness judged across entire interaction histories. This paper advances the theory of temporal fair division by introducing Rotational Periodicity (RP), a family of lightweight metrics, alongside the ALT family of sliding-window measures, within a unified framework for repeated multi-agent resource competition. We formalise the Multi-Agent Battle of the Exes (MBoE) as a repeated fair division instance and establish Perfect Alternation (PA) as its canonical temporally fair solution, drawing connections to proportionality, envy-freeness, and n-periodic round-robin allocation. RP decomposes temporal fairness into two complementary sub-measures: Rotational Score (RS) and Waiting Periods Evaluation (WPE), achieving O(nu+n) time complexity versus the O(nu*n) of ALT, where nu is the episode count and n the agent count. Empirical evaluation across n in {2,3,5,8,10} reveals three findings. First, both RP and ALT expose a coordination failure invisible to traditional metrics: Q-learning agents perform worse than random policies by 10-73% on RP and 7-35% on CALT, while Reward Fairness remains misleadingly high (above 0.92 for n>=3). Second, RP achieves 12-25x computational speedup over ALT, growing with n. Third, the two families are complementary: ALT provides richer discrimination for small populations; RP scales reliably where ALT becomes intractable. Together they form a diagnostic toolkit for temporal fair division.

Effective collaboration between embodied agents requires more than acting in a shared environment; it demands communication grounded in each agent's evolving understanding of the world. When agents can only partially observe their surroundings, coordination without communication is provably hard, but communication can, in principle, bridge this gap by allowing agents to share observations and align their world models. In this work, we examine whether LLM-based embodied agents actually realize the ability to communicate. We extend PARTNR, a benchmark for collaborative household robotics, with a natural-language dialogue channel that enables two agents with partial observability to communicate during task execution. To evaluate whether dialogue leads to genuine world-model alignment rather than superficial coordination, we propose a framework for measuring world-model alignment defined over per-agent world graphs: observation convergence (do private world models align over time?), information novelty (do messages convey what the partner lacks?), and belief-sensitive messaging (do agents model what their partner knows?). Our experiments across three LLMs reveal that dialogue reduces action conflicts 40 to 83 percentage points but degrades task success relative to silent coordination. Using our metrics, we characterize the gap between superficial coordination and genuine world-model alignment, and identify where current models fall on this spectrum. Project Website: https://uiuc-conversational-ai-lab.github.io/partnr-dial-wmd/

Zero-shot coordination (ZSC) aims to enable agents to cooperate with independently trained partners without prior interaction, a key requirement for real-world multi-agent systems and human-AI collaboration. Existing approaches have largely emphasized increasing partner diversity during training, yet such strategies often fall short of achieving reliable generalization to unseen partners. We introduce State-Blocked Coordination (SBC), a simple yet effective framework that improves ZSC by inducing diverse interaction scenarios without direct environment modification. Specifically, SBC generates a family of virtual environments through state blocking, allowing agents to experience a wide range of suboptimal partner policies. Across multiple benchmarks, SBC demonstrates superior performance in zero-shot coordination, including strong generalization to human partners.

The integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) with Distributed Ledger Technology (DLT) has become a growing research area, yet contributions tend to cluster around specific application domains or examine only one direction of the integration, leaving the broader architectural interplay between the two technologies poorly understood. This work addresses that gap through a structured, bidirectional review of peer-reviewed studies published between 2020 and 2025. We classify contributions along two directions: AI-enhanced DLT, and DLT-enhanced AI. In the first case, we examine how AI techniques improve DLT systems across five layers: data, network, consensus, execution, and application layers. In the second case, we analyse how DLT supports AI systems across five layers: infrastructure, data, model, inference, and application layers, with particular attention to federated learning, model evaluation, and multi-agent coordination. The analysis reveals that most works concentrate on a small subset of layers: execution and consensus for AI-enhanced DLT, data and model for DLT-enhanced AI. Other layers remain comparatively neglected. Despite reported improvements in controlled settings, no study demonstrates deployment at production scale, and the field has not yet offered satisfying answers to fundamental questions around scalability, interoperability, and verifiable execution. We argue that progress will require cross-layer co-design and empirical validation in real-world settings.

As artificial intelligence engineering paradigms shift from single-agent Prompt and Context Engineering toward multi-agent \textbf{Coordination Engineering}, the ability to codify and systematically improve how multiple agents collaborate has emerged as a critical bottleneck. While single-agent skills can now be distributed as portable assets, multi-agent coordination protocols remain locked within framework-internal code or static configurations, preventing them from being shared across systems or autonomously improved over time. We propose \textbf{Swarm Skills}, a portable specification that extends the Anthropic Skills standard with multi-agent semantics. Swarm Skills turns multi-agent workflows into first-class, distributable assets that consist of roles, workflows, execution bounds, and a built-in semantic structure for self-evolution. To operationalize the specification's evolving nature, we present a companion self-evolution algorithm that automatically distills successful execution trajectories into new Swarm Skills and continuously patches existing ones based on multi-dimensional scoring (Effectiveness, Utilization, and Freshness), eliminating the need for human-in-the-loop oversight during the refinement process. Through an architectural compatibility analysis and a comprehensive qualitative case study using the open-source JiuwenSwarm reference implementation, we demonstrate how Swarm Skills achieves zero-adapter cross-agent portability via progressive disclosure, enabling agent teams to self-evolve their coordination strategies without framework lock-in.

Large language model (LLM)-based multi-agent systems have shown strong potential on complex tasks through agent specialization, tool use, and collaborative reasoning. However, most automated multi-agent system design methods still follow a one-shot paradigm: a workflow is optimized or selected before execution and then reused unchanged throughout the task. This static coordination strategy is ill-suited for long-horizon tasks whose subgoals, intermediate evidence, and information needs evolve over multiple execution stages. We propose EvoMAS, a framework for execution-time multi-agent workflow construction. EvoMAS formulates workflow construction as a meta-level sequential decision problem along a single task trajectory. At each stage, it constructs an explicit task state through a Planner-Evaluator-Updater pipeline and uses a learned Workflow Adapter to instantiate a stage-specific layered workflow from a fixed pool of candidate agents. The adapter is trained with policy gradients using sparse, verifiable terminal task success as the main supervision signal, while evaluator-based process reward is analyzed separately under very-hard sparse-reward settings. Experiments on GAIA, HLE, and DeepResearcher show that EvoMAS outperforms single-agent baselines and recent automated multi-agent workflow design methods. Our analyses further show that explicit task-state construction and learned workflow adaptation provide complementary benefits. Additional results indicate that process reward is most useful when terminal success is extremely sparse, and qualitative case studies illustrate that EvoMAS adapts agent coordination as the task state evolves.

Multi-agent systems can be extremely efficient when working concurrently and collaboratively, e.g., for delivery, surveillance, search and rescue. Coordination of such teams often involves two aspects: selecting appropriate subteams for different tasks in various areas, and coordinating agents in the subteams to execute the associated subtasks. Existing work often assumes that the tasks are static and known beforehand, where an integer program can be formulated and solved offline. However, in many applications, the team-wise tasks are generated online continually by external requests, and the amount of subtasks within each task is uncertain, e.g., the number of packages to deliver or victims to rescue. The aforementioned offline solution becomes inadequate as it would require constant re-computation for the whole team and global communication to broadcast the results. Thus, this work tackles the large-scale coordination problem under continual and uncertain temporal tasks, specified as temporal logic formulas over collaborative actions. The proposed hierarchical framework, HULK, consists of two interleaved layers: the rolling assignment of currently known tasks to subteams within a certain horizon, and the dynamic coordination within a subteam given the detected subtasks during online execution. Thus, coordination is performed hierarchically at different granularities and triggering conditions, improving computational efficiency and robustness. The method is validated rigorously over large-scale heterogeneous systems under various temporal tasks and environment uncertainties.

Multi-agent large language model (LLM) systems often rely on a controller to coordinate a pool of heterogeneous models, yet existing controllers are typically limited to one-shot routing: they select a model once and return its output directly. Such routing-only designs provide no mechanism to critique intermediate drafts or support iterative refinement. To address this limitation, we propose a critique-and-routing controller that casts multi-agent coordination as a sequential decision problem. At each turn, the controller evaluates the current draft, decides whether to stop or continue, and, if needed, selects the next agent for further refinement. We formulate this process as a finite-horizon Markov Decision Process (MDP) with explicit agent-utilization constraints, design a composite reward for controller decisions across turns, and optimize the controller via policy gradients under a Lagrangian-relaxed objective. Extensive experiments across multiple heterogeneous multi-agent systems and seven reasoning benchmarks show that our method consistently outperforms state-of-the-art baselines and substantially narrows the gap to the strongest agent, while using it for fewer than 25% of total calls.

We present TraceFix, a verification-first pipeline for Large Language Model (LLM) multi-agent coordination. An agent synthesizes a protocol topology as a structured intermediate representation (IR) from a task description, generates PlusCal coordination logic, and iteratively repairs the protocol using counterexamples from the TLA+ model checker (TLC) until verification succeeds. Verified process bodies are compiled into per-agent system prompts and executed under a runtime monitor that rejects out-of-topology coordination operations. On 48 tasks spanning 16 scenario families, all tasks reach full TLC verification; 62.5% pass on the first attempt and none requires more than four repair iterations. State spaces span six orders of magnitude yet verification completes in under 60 s for every task. A 3,456-run runtime comparison shows that topology-monitored execution achieves the highest task completion (89.4% average, 81.5% full) and that runtimes using the verified protocol degrade at roughly half the rate of prompt-only and chat-only baselines when model capability is reduced. A paired ablation under a fixed runtime shows that TLC-verified protocols cut deadlock/livelock (DL/LL) from 31.1% to 14.1%, with the largest separation under fault injection.

The concurrent target assignment and pathfinding (TAPF) problem extends multi-agent pathfinding (MAPF) by asking planners to allocate distinct targets and collision-free paths to agents. Prior work on TAPF has relied exclusively on Conflict-Based Search (CBS), which tightly couples target assignment and pathfinding, resulting in compute-intensive, non-scalable solutions. In contrast, we propose an iterative refinement framework that decouples target assignment from pathfinding. Our framework builds on modern, fast, suboptimal MAPF solvers, such as LaCAM. Specifically, within a given time budget, it repeatedly solves MAPF for the current target assignment, identifies bottleneck agents via MAPF feedback, and refines the assignment. Empirical results show that feedback-driven reassignment loop is effective, enabling our framework to scale well beyond the reach of the state-of-the-art CBS-based solver while maintaining decent solution quality. This represents a solid step toward practical, large scale TAPF suitable for real-world setups.

Distributed agents in real-world settings frequently must coordinate under uncertainty with only partial observations. Coordination is necessary to share beliefs to aid in task completion, but communication costs bandwidth, introduces latency, and if done poorly, can degrade collective reasoning. This tension is especially acute in bandwidth-constrained deployments such as distributed sensing networks, autonomous reconnaissance, and collaborative cyber defense, where excessive transmission carries direct operational costs. Existing work has focused on multi-agent exploration and communication strategies, but not on how communication frequency and content jointly shape the collective belief state. Central to this challenge is the degree to which agents maintain compatible internal beliefs about the environment, a property we term \textit{epistemic alignment}. When agents share beliefs effectively, they converge on correct hypotheses; when communication is poorly designed, agents may converge confidently on wrong ones. We formalize this distinction and show it is not detectable from coordination metrics alone such as Jensen-Shannon Divergence or rate to consensus.

Grounding is the collaborative process of establishing mutual belief sufficient for a communicative goal. While static grounding maps language to a shared context, dynamic grounding requires agents to negotiate meaning across turns. Current multi-agent Large Language Model (LLM) benchmarks largely emphasize static, one-shot tasks, overlooking whether agents can repair grounding breakdowns through interaction. We introduce an iterated multi-turn negotiation game where two agents allocate shared resources to private projects with verifiable jointly optimal outcomes. Although individual agents can identify Pareto-optimal allocations in isolation, agent dyads consistently fail to reach them across models. We identify four failure modes: (1) loss of shared interaction history, (2) stubborn anchoring to early proposals, (3) defaulting to equal splits over reward-maximizing coordination, and (4) referential binding errors across turns. Our baselines show that the coordination gap is not explained by individual reasoning limits or insufficient information exchange alone. Instead, the bottleneck lies in dynamic grounding: joint plan formation, commitment, and execution.

Distributed blackbox consensus optimization is a fundamental problem in multi-agent systems, where agents must improve a global objective using only local objective queries and limited neighbor communication. Existing methods largely rely on handcrafted update rules and static cooperation patterns, which often struggle to balance local adaptation, global coordination, and communication efficiency in heterogeneous nonconvex environments. In this paper, we take an initial step toward trajectory-driven self-design for distributed black-box consensus optimization. We first redesign the agent-level swarm dynamics with an adaptive internal mechanism tailored to decentralized consensus settings, improving the balance between exploration, convergence, and local escape. Built on top of this adaptive execution layer, we propose Learning to Act and Cooperate (LACMAS), a trajectorydriven framework in which large language models provide sparse highlevel guidance for shaping both agentinternal action behaviors and agentexternal cooperation patterns from historical optimization trajectories. We further introduce a phased cognitive scheduling strategy to activate different forms of adaptation in a resource-aware manner. Experiments on standard distributed black-box benchmarks and real-world distributed tasks show that LAC-MAS consistently improves solution quality, convergence efficiency, and communication efficiency over strong baselines, suggesting a practical route from handcrafted distributed coordination toward self-designing multi-agent optimization systems.

LLM-based multi-agent systems (MAS) show promise on complex tasks but remain prone to coordination failures such as goal drift, error cascades, and misaligned behaviors. We propose Explicit Trait Inference (ETI), a psychologically grounded method for improving coordination. ETI enables agents to infer and track partner characteristics along two established psychological dimensions--warmth (e.g., trust) and competence (e.g., skill)--from interaction histories to guide decisions. We evaluate ETI in controlled settings (economic games), where it reduces payoff loss by 45-77%, and in more realistic, complex multi-agent settings (MultiAgentBench), where it improves performance by 3-29% depending on the scenario and model, relative to a CoT baseline. Additional analysis shows that gains are closely linked to trait inference: ETI profiles predict agents' actions, and informative profiles drive improvements. These results highlight ETI as a lightweight and robust mechanism for improving coordination in diverse multi-agent settings, and provide the first systematic evidence that LLM agents can (i) reliably infer others' traits from interaction histories and (ii) leverage structured awareness of others' traits for coordination.

In long-horizon open-world multi-agent systems, existing methods often treat local anomalies as automatic triggers for communication. This default design introduces coordination noise, interrupts local execution, and overuses public interaction in cases that could be resolved locally. To address this issue, we propose a partitioned information architecture for MLLM agents that explicitly separates private execution states from public coordination states. Building on this design, we introduce two key mechanisms. First, we develop an event-triggered working memory based on system-verified outcomes to maintain compact and low-noise local state representations. Second, we propose a cost-sensitive gated escalation mechanism that determines whether cross-region communication should be initiated by jointly considering node criticality, local recovery cost, and downstream task impact. In this way, communication is transformed from a default reaction into a selective decision. Experiments conducted on long-term construction tasks in open environments demonstrate that, compared to baseline models based on strong communication and planned structures, the introduction of gated communication and a partitioned information architecture results in superior performance in terms of blueprint completion quality and execution chain length. It also improves local self-recovery, reduces ineffective escalations, and increases the utility of public communication.

Multi-agent reinforcement learning (MARL) is crucial for AI systems that operate collaboratively in distributed and adversarial settings, particularly in multi-domain operations (MDO). A central challenge in cooperative MARL is determining how agents should coordinate: existing approaches must either hand-specify graph topology, rely on proximity-based heuristics, or learn structure entirely from environment interaction; all of which are brittle, semantically uninformed, or data-intensive. We investigate whether large language models (LLMs) can generate useful coordination graph priors for MARL by using minimal natural language descriptions of agent observations to infer latent coordination patterns. These priors are integrated into MARL algorithms via graph convolutional layers within a graph neural network (GNN)-based pipeline, and evaluated on four cooperative scenarios from the Multi-Agent Particle Environment (MPE) benchmark against baselines spanning the full spectrum of coordination modeling, from independent learners to state-of-the-art graph-based methods. We further ablate across five compact open-source LLMs to assess the sensitivity of prior quality to model choice. Our results provide the first quantitative evidence that LLM-derived graph priors can enhance coordination and adaptability in dynamic multi-agent environments, and demonstrate that models as small as 1.5B parameters are sufficient for effective prior generation.

Coordination research collapses four objects: operative control, authorization, a model-derived friction score, and observed outcomes. The Axiom of Consent is a stake-weighted unanimity principle; majority and supermajority thresholds are explicit relaxations, not versions of the axiom. Decision loci are structural facts, whereas authorization and legitimacy require normative and measurement premises. Alignment, calibrated stakes, and information deficit are candidate coordinates, and F = sigma(1 + epsilon)/(1 + alpha) is a phenomenological ansatz. The Replicator-Optimization Mechanism supplies a conditional persistence interface: irreducibility suffices for its finite, static, positive-fitness continuous-time Perron result; primitivity is required only for the corresponding discrete-time power convergence, and the componentwise ranking is narrower. Neither persistence result derives authorization. A resource-allocation instantiation specifies an identification contract but observes no authorization acts or effective voice. Its exploratory MARL companion uses target-vector correlation and observation noise as narrow proxy treatments, not measures of general alignment or information deficit. Under that proxy and reward-gap design, the composite loses to an independent-effects model and a feasible-centred frozen crossing yields the opposite interaction direction. Cooperative target correlation lowers the gap under shared-state contention; separable IQL is structurally invariant and separable VDN is a non-detection. Paired partial sharing modulates the gradient without establishing an exact dose law or endpoint equivalence. Target support changes opposition and residual-policy conclusions. The surviving contribution is an authorization architecture and measurement discipline, not a universal friction law.

For groups of autonomous agents to achieve a particular goal, they must engage in coordination and long-horizon reasoning. Rather than relying on complex reward functions and explicit cooperation mechanisms, we ask what minimal ingredients are required for effective coordination and exploration to emerge in multi-agent settings. We investigate this question through self-supervised goal-reaching, where agents aim to maximize the likelihood of visiting a goal state rather than maximizing a reward. Despite a sparse feedback signal, we present empirical results that show self-supervised goal-reaching techniques enable agents to learn from such feedback. On MARL benchmarks, self-supervised goal-reaching outperforms alternative approaches that have access to the same sparse reward signal. Furthermore, we empirically demonstrate that multi-agent self-supervised goal-reaching approaches can be more robust than single-agent strategies. While there is no explicit exploration mechanism, this approach explores nontrivial intermediate coordination strategies in sparse settings where alternative approaches fail to achieve a single success.

As robots become more integrated in society, their ability to coordinate with other robots and humans on multi-modal tasks (those with multiple valid solutions) is crucial. Such behaviors can be learned from expert demonstrations via imitation learning (IL), but when expert demonstrations are multi-modal, standard IL approaches usually average across modes or collapse to a single mode, preventing effective coordination. Being inspired by diffusion models' ability to capture complex multi-modal trajectory distributions in single-agent settings, we develop a diffusion-based framework for coordinated multi-modal behavior in multi-agent systems. However, existing multi-agent diffusion approaches typically require a centralized planner or explicit communication among agents. This assumption can fail in real-world scenarios where robots must operate independently or with agents like humans that they cannot directly communicate with. Therefore, we propose MIMIC-D, a joint training with decentralized execution paradigm for multi-modal multi-agent IL via diffusion. We jointly train all agents' policies with only local information to achieve implicit coordination. In simulation and hardware experiments, our method exhibits robust multi-modal coordination behavior in various tasks and environments, improving upon state-of-the-art baselines.