Multi-Agent Systems

Large language model (LLM) multi-agent systems typically rely on rigid orchestration, committing either to flat per-query routing or to hand-engineered task decomposition, so decomposition depth, worker choice, and inference budget are not jointly optimized under one objective. We introduce Uno-Orchestra, a unified orchestration policy that selectively decomposes a task and dispatches each subtask to an admissible (model, primitive) pair, with both decisions learned together from curated RL trajectories grounded in real worker interactions. Against 22 baselines on a 13-benchmark suite spanning math, code, knowledge, long-context, and agentic tool-use, Uno-Orchestra reaches 77.0% macro pass@1, roughly 16% above the strongest workflow baseline, at roughly an order of magnitude lower per-query cost, advancing the accuracy-efficiency frontier of selective delegation.

LLM-empowered multi-agent systems offer new potential to accelerate scientific discovery by generating novel research ideas. However, existing methods typically coordinate agents through temporary texts, such as drafts or chat logs; it is difficult to pinpoint the weaknesses in the generated ideas and how the agents refine them. To this end, we introduce \textbf{Evolving Idea Graphs} (EIG), a graph-based multi-agent scientific ideation framework that can generate high-performance research ideas across various benchmark-native metrics, such as novelty, feasibility, and clarity. Instead of coordinating solely through texts, EIG represents a partially formed proposal as an evolving idea graph, where nodes capture scientific claims and edges encode relations (e.g., support and conflict), enabling unresolved weaknesses to remain identifiable throughout the idea evolving process. Specifically, a learned two-head controller operates over the evolving graph to guide the ideation: one head selects graph edits for agents to execute, while the other decides when the graph is ready for commit as final proposal synthesis. On AI Idea Bench 2025 and LiveIdeaBench, EIG outperforms all compared systems on both automatic benchmark scores and blind expert ratings. Ablations further show that explicit graph state provides the main performance gains, and learned edit-and-commit control adds consistent improvements.

While Large Language Models (LLMs) excel in certain reasoning tasks, they struggle in multi-agent games where the final outcome depends on the joint strategies of all agents. In multi-agent games, the non-stationarity of other agents brings significant challenges on the evaluation of the reasoning process and the credit assignment over multiple reasoning steps. Existing single-agent reinforcement learning (RL) approaches and their multi-agent extensions fail to address these challenges as they do not incorporate other agents in the reasoning process. In this work, we propose Strat-Reasoner, a novel RL-based framework that improves LLMs' strategic reasoning ability in multi-agent games. We introduce a novel recursive reasoning paradigm where an agent's reasoning also integrates other agents' reasoning processes. To provide effective reward signals for the intermediate reasoning sequences, we employ a centralized Chain-of-Thought (CoT) comparison module to evaluate the reasoning quality. Finally, we compute an accurate hybrid advantage and develop a group-relative RL approach to optimize the LLM policy. Experimental results show that Strat-Reasoner substantially improves strategic abilities of underlying LLMs, achieving 22.1% average performance improvements across various multi-agent games. Code is publicly available at https://github.com/ydhe1012/Strat-Reasoner.

Reinforcement learning has increasingly been applied to economic decision-making, including taxation, public spending, and labor supply. However, existing RL-based economic models typically consider only a single government-household group, overlooking strategic interactions among competing governments. To address this limitation, we formulate taxation as a hierarchical multi-group game. Within each group, the government and households form a leader--follower game, while governments compete across groups through strategic fiscal policies. This coupled structure is difficult to solve using standard multi-agent reinforcement learning (MARL) methods. We therefore propose a bilevel MARL framework with \textit{Curriculum Learning} and a \textit{Closed-Loop Sequential Update} mechanism to improve training stability and convergence. We instantiate the framework in a taxation simulation environment grounded in classical economic models, supporting the evaluation of taxation policies under inter-group competition. Experiments show that the proposed method learns stable and sustainable tax policies. Compared with a two-group baseline without the proposed mechanisms, our approach avoids premature game collapse, extends the effective game duration by 60.92%, and reduces GDP disparities among governments by 44.12%.

This paper investigates the autonomous synchronization problem for discrete-time heterogeneous multiagent systems. The synchronization problem is transformed into the asymptotic decoupling problem of stable modes in a class of discrete-time linear time-varying systems, for which we provide a sufficient condition. Leveraging this condition, synchronization conditions are established. The synchronization conditions are based on the average of the agents' initial dynamic matrices, without requiring the differences among these matrices to be small. This approach reduces the conservativeness of existing conditions and achieves a unification of both homogeneous and heterogeneous systems. Numerical simulation results are provided to support the theoretical findings.

Telecommunication networks are increasingly complex due to heterogeneous technologies, diverse service requirements, and growing demands for resource efficiency and business agility. Intent-Based Networking (IBN) and, more recently, agentic AI have emerged as promising paradigms to address this complexity through autonomous network management. However, existing approaches primarily focus on operational orchestration within Operations Support Systems (OSS) and lack an integrated framework that spans Business Support Systems (BSS) and OSS, limiting the realisation of true intent-to-business-to-network coordination. This paper presents a role-based multi-agent architecture (MAS) for end-to-end intent orchestration that mirrors Communication Service Provider (CSP) organisational structures. The proposed framework applies principles of functional decomposition, explicit task ownership, privacy-preserving domain separation, and domain-specific expertise within a hierarchical four-layer agent system spanning customer engagement, strategic planning, service delivery, and infrastructure provisioning. Leadership agents coordinate planning activities, whilst specialised service and resource agents are dynamically instantiated according to intent requirements. A proof-of-concept implementation demonstrates the feasibility of bridging the BSS-OSS divide through structured agent coordination, illustrating how agentic MAS can support accountable and scalable intent-driven service orchestration.

Human Activity Recognition (HAR) using Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU) sensors is a cornerstone of mobile health, smart environments, and human-computer interaction. However, current deep learning-based HAR models often struggle with heavy reliance on labeled data, position-specific ambiguity, and a lack of transparent reasoning. Inspired by the advanced agents framework, which emulates a collaborative agent using Large Language Models (LLMs), we propose SensingAgents, a novel multi-agent system for robust IMU activity recognition. SensingAgents organizes LLM-powered agents into specialized roles: a group of Analyst Agents for position-specific sensor analysis (arm, wrist, belt, pocket), a pair of Advocate Agents that resolves sensor conflicts through dynamic and static dialectical debates, and a Decision Agent that ensures reliability under sensor drift or failure. Evaluation on the Shoaib dataset demonstrates that SensingAgents significantly outperforms state-of-the-art single-agent and multi-agent LLM models, achieving an accuracy of 79.5% in a zero setting--29% higher than existing agent models and 9.4% higher than deep learning baselines--particularly in complex scenarios where multi-sensor data is conflicting or noisy. Our work highlights the potential of multi-agent collaborative reasoning for advancing the robustness and interpretability of ubiquitous sensing systems.

We formally establish the equivalence between Observation Delay (OD) and Action Delay (AD) in cooperative partially observable multi-agent systems using observation-action histories. We show that both systems generate identical admissible joint-policy sets, and their induced state-action-observation trajectories are identical in distribution, leading to identical optimal solutions in Decentralized Partially Observable Markov Decision Processes (Dec-POMDPs). This formally generalizes existing infinite-horizon single-agent results to any-horizon partially observable cooperative multi-agent problems with decentralized policy execution, and allows any mixed-delay configuration to be reduced to a pure OD system. We further prove that in Transition-Independent MDPs (TI-MDPs), the observation-action history reduces to a tractable minimal local augmented state. However, we show through numerical experiments that although the optimal solution spaces are structurally isomorphic, the practical learning dynamics are fundamentally different. First, using the minimal local augmented state, the equivalence no longer holds when transitions are not independent. Second, operational constraints and causal credit-assignment errors in Temporal Difference (TD) algorithms induce different learning behaviors across regimes. Finally, leveraging this structural equivalence to bypass these learning challenges, we demonstrate successful multi-agent zero-shot policy transfer from OD to AD, paving the way for unified, efficient solution methods in complex delayed systems.

Static capabilities benchmarks suffer from saturation and contamination, making it difficult to track capabilities progress over time. We introduce Agent Island, a multiplayer simulation environment in which language-model agents compete in a game of interagent cooperation, conflict, and persuasion. The environment yields a dynamic benchmark designed to mitigate both saturation and contamination; new models can always outperform the current leading player in this winner-take-all game, and agents compete against other adaptive agents rather than face a fixed task set. We rank players with a Bayesian Plackett-Luce model, allowing us to quantify uncertainty in player skill. In 999 games involving 49 unique models, openai/gpt-5.5 dominates its peers with a posterior mean skill of 5.64, compared with 3.10 for the second-ranked model, openai/gpt-5.2, and 2.86 for the third-ranked model, openai/gpt-5.3-codex. We release the game logs as a dataset for analyses of model behavior. As an example, we investigate same-provider preference in final-round votes and find that models are 8.3 p.p. more likely to support a same-provider finalist than finalists from other providers. This preference is not uniform across providers: among separately estimated providers, the effect is strongest for OpenAI models and weakest for Anthropic models.

Persistent memory is turning language-model-based agents from stateless participants in isolated interactions into state-bearing components of LLM-based multi-agent systems. As memory becomes durable, reloadable, and behavior-shaping across agents, sessions, or versions, a design question arises that is not captured by retrieval accuracy or access control alone: which candidate memories should become shared institutional state? This Viewpoint frames that problem as governed collaborative memory. We argue that memory governance functions as a selection regime, determining which memory variants persist, which remain private, and which are rejected, abstained from, or superseded. We distinguish ungoverned persistence, constitutional or hybrid selection, automatic metric-based selection, and human-ratified artificial selection, emphasizing that these regimes are not a ranking but a design choice over target properties. We then describe a layered architecture that separates agent-local memory, shared institutional memory, archive memory, and project-continuity memory, with provenance and version lineage making selection inspectable. Documented traces from one running LLM-based multi-agent ecosystem illustrate unmanaged false-memory persistence, ratified institutional memory, rejection and revision, identity-preserving expansion, and governance-as-learning. The contribution is a design agenda: persistent LLM-based multi-agent systems should evaluate memory not only for recall and performance, but also for provenance fidelity, selection traceability, epistemic quality, correction pathways, and role preservation.

Coordinating multi-agent systems over spatially distributed areas requires solving a complex hierarchical problem: first distributing areas among agents (allocation) and subsequently determining the optimal visitation order (routing). Existing methods typically decouple these stages ignoring inter-stage dependencies or rely on decentralized heuristics that lack global context. In this work, we propose a centralized, fully end-to-end auto-regressive framework that jointly generates allocation decisions and routing sequences. The core contribution of our approach is a multi-stage decoding mechanism that unifies high-level allocation and low-level routing in a single autoregressive pass while maintaining a centralized global state. This enables the model to implicitly balance workload distribution with routing efficiency, avoiding local optima common in decentralized methods. Extensive experiments demonstrate that our method significantly outperforms diverse baselines, achieving up to a 20% improvement in solution quality over industrial solvers such as Google OR-Tools, IBM CPLEX, and LKH-3, while reducing computation time from hours to seconds.

High-precision CNC machining of free-form aerospace components requires bounded compensations informed by inspection, simulation, and process knowledge. Off-the-shelf large language model (LLM) assistants can generate text, but they do not reliably execute risk-constrained multi-step numerical workflows or provide auditable provenance for high-stakes decisions. We present multi-agent knowledge analysis (MAKA), a human-in-the-loop decision-support architecture that separates intent routing, tools-only quantitative analysis, knowledge graph retrieval, and critic-based verification that enforces physical plausibility, safety bounds, and provenance completeness before recommendations are surfaced for human approval. MAKA is instantiated on a Ti-6Al-4V rotor blade machining testbed by fusing virtual-machining path-tracking error fields, cutting-force and deflection simulations, and scan-based 3D inspection deviation maps from 16 blades. The analysis decomposes deviation into an evidence-linked pathing component, a drift-based wear proxy capturing systematic evolution across parts, a residual systematic compliance term, and a variability proxy for instability-aware escalation. In a three-level tool-orchestration benchmark (single-step through $\geq$3-step stateful sequences), MAKA improves successful tool execution by up to 87.5 percentage points relative to an unstructured single-model interaction pattern with identical tool access. Digital twin what-if studies show MAKA can coordinate traceable compensation candidates that reduce predicted surface deviation from order $10^{-2}$in to approximately $\pm 10^{-3}$in over most of the blade within the simulation environment, providing a pre-deployment verification signal for risk-aware human decision-making.

Multi-Agent Systems (MAS) built using AI agents fulfill a variety of user intents that may be used to design and build a family of related applications. However, the creation of such MAS currently involves manual composition of the plan, manual selection of appropriate agents, and manual creation of execution graphs. This paper introduces a framework for the automated creation of multi-agent systems which replaces multiple manual steps with an automated framework. The proposed framework consists of software modules and a workflow to orchestrate the requisite task- specific application. The modules include: an LLM-derived planner, a set of tasks described in natural language, a dynamic call graph, an orchestrator for map agents to tasks, and an agent recommender that finds the most suitable agent(s) from local and global agent registries. The agent recommender uses a two-stage information retrieval (IR) system comprising a fast retriever and an LLM-based re-ranker. We implemented a series of experiments exploring the choice of embedders, re- rankers, agent description enrichment, and supervising critique agent. We benchmarked this system end-to-end, evaluating the combination of planning, agent selection, and task completion, with our proposed approach. Our experimental results show that our approach outperforms the state-of-the- art in terms of the recall rate and is more robust and scalable compared to previous approaches. The critique agent holistically reevaluates both agent and tool recommendations against the overall plan. We show that the inclusion of the critique agent further enhances the recall score, proving that the comprehensive review and revision of task-based agent selection is an essential step in building end-to-end multi-agent systems.

Distributed collaborative intelligence (DCI), encompassing edge-to-edge architectures, federated learning, transfer learning, and swarm systems, creates environments in which emergent risk is structurally unavoidable: locally correct decisions by individual agents compose into globally unacceptable behavioral trajectories under uncertainty. Existing approaches such as constrained optimization, safe reinforcement learning, and runtime assurance evaluate acceptability at the level of individual actions rather than across behavioral trajectories, and none addresses the multi-participant, uncertainty-laden nature of DCI deployments. This paper introduces mechanical conscience (MC), a novel concept and simplified mathematical framework that operationalizes trajectory-level normative regulation for both single-agent and distributed intelligent systems. Mechanical conscience is defined as a supervisory filter that minimally corrects a baseline policy's actions to reduce cumulative deviation from a normatively admissible region, while accounting for epistemic uncertainty. We introduce associated constructs, conscience score, mechanical guilt, and resonant dependability, that provide an interpretable vocabulary and computable governance signals for this emerging field. Core theoretical properties are established: admissibility equivalence, existence of optimal regulation, and monotonic deviation reduction. Illustrative results demonstrate that MC-regulated agents maintain trajectory-level normative acceptability where conventional controllers drift outside admissible bounds, and that the framework naturally extends to suppress interaction-induced emergent risk in multi-agent DCI settings.

Multi-agent LLM systems fail in production at rates between 41% and 87%, mostly due to coordination defects rather than base-model capability. Existing responses split between cataloguing failure modes empirically and shipping declarative orchestration frameworks as engineering tools; neither delivers a principled mapping from coordination configuration to predictable failure-mode signature. We argue that coordination should be treated as a configurable architectural layer, separable from agent logic and from information access, enabling architectural reasoning rather than only engineering productivity. We instantiate this with an information-controlled design on prediction markets: a single LLM, fixed tools, fixed per-call output cap, and fixed prompt template across five reference coordination configurations, with total compute per question treated as an endogenous architectural output. The Murphy decomposition of the Brier score separates calibration from discriminative power, so configurations leave distinguishable signatures even when aggregate scores coincide. On 100 Polymarket binary markets resolved after the model's training cutoff (claude-opus-4-6) we report Murphy signatures, a cost-quality Pareto frontier, category-conditioned analysis, and a bootstrap power-projection. Three of five pre-specified predictions are upheld in direction; two configurations dominate the Pareto frontier within this regime; exploratory bootstrap intervals separate consensus alignment from others, though pairwise tests do not survive Bonferroni correction at n=100. We also deploy the same configurations as live agents on Foresight Arena under web-search-enabled conditions, as an on-chain replication channel accumulating in parallel. Harness, trace dataset, and production agents are released. We position this as a methodology-validating first instantiation, not a general cross-model claim.

The increasing penetration of renewable energy has introduced substantial volatility into wholesale electricity markets, complicating the optimal bidding strategies for power producers. Traditional Reinforcement Learning (RL) approaches often struggle to balance profit maximization with risk management, frequently overfitting to specific market conditions or failing to account for the stochastic spread between Day-Ahead (DA) and Real-Time (RT) settlements. To address these challenges, this paper makes two primary contributions. First, we introduce and open-source a high-fidelity gymnasium environment for two-settlement electricity market bidding. Grounded in extensive empirical data from the PJM Interconnection, the environment explicitly models the interplay between DA commitments and RT deviations, providing a standardized testbed for general and risk-sensitive agents. Second, we propose MARS-DA (Multi-Agent Regime-Switching for Day-Ahead markets), a novel hierarchical framework that orchestrates distinct sub-policies for risk management and profit seeking. MARS-DA utilizes a top-level Meta-Controller to dynamically blend the actions of two specialized base agents: a "Safe Agent" that optimizes for reliable DA allocation and a "Speculator Agent" that targets volatile RT arbitrage opportunities. Extensive experiments demonstrate that MARS-DA achieves superior risk-adjusted returns compared to state-of-the-art baselines while maintaining robust regime alignment during periods of extreme market volatility.

Collections of interacting AI agents can form coalitions, creating emergent group-level organization that is critical for AI safety and alignment. However, observing agent behavior alone is often insufficient to distinguish genuine informational coupling from spurious similarity, as consequential coalitions may form at the level of internal representations before any overt behavioral change is apparent. Here, we introduce a practical method for detecting coalition structure from the internal neural representations of multi-agent systems. The approach constructs a pairwise mutual-information graph from the hidden states of agents and applies spectral partitioning to identify the most salient coalition boundary. We validate this method in two domains. First, in multi-agent reinforcement learning environments, the method successfully recovers programmed hierarchical and dynamic coalition structures and correctly rejects false positives arising from behavioral coordination without informational coupling. Second, using a large language model, the method identifies coalition structures implied by descriptive prompts, tracks dynamic team reassignments, and reveals a representational hierarchy where explicit labels dominate over conflicting interaction patterns. Across both settings, the recovered partition reveals subgroup organization that a scalar cross-agent mutual-information measure cannot distinguish. The results demonstrate that analyzing hidden-state mutual information through spectral partitioning provides a scalable diagnostic for identifying representational coalitions, offering a valuable tool for monitoring emergent structure in distributed AI systems.

Language models (LMs) are increasingly used in high-stakes, multi-agent settings, where following instructions and maintaining value alignment are critical. Most alignment research focuses on interactions between a single LM and a single user, failing to address the risk of misaligned behavior spreading between multiple LMs in multi-turn interactions. We find evidence of this phenomenon, which we call misalignment contagion, across multiple LMs as they engage multi-turn conversational social dilemma games. Specifically, we find that LMs become more anti-social after gameplay and that this effect is intensified when other players are steered to act maliciously. We explore different steering techniques to mitigate such misalignment contagion and find that reinforcing an LM's system prompt is insufficient and often harmful. Instead, we propose steering with implicit traits: a technique that intermittently injects system prompts with statements that reinforce an LMs initial traits and is more effective than system prompt repetition at keeping models in line with their initial pro-social behaviors. Importantly, this method does not require access to model parameters or internal model states, making it suitable for increasingly common use cases where complex multi-agent workflows are being designed with black box models.

Automated research agents increasingly generate code, retrieve literature, and draft scientific artifacts, but they often fail to verify whether generated experiments execute correctly or whether cited sources support generated claims. We present AutoResearch, an execution-grounded multi-agent framework for reliable research workflow automation. AutoResearch couples sandboxed Python/PyTorch execution, iterative code repair, citation verification, claim-support auditing, decision control, and structured \LaTeX{} artifact generation. The system treats runtime errors, citation-verification failures, and review-agent feedback as practical filtering signals for generated research artifacts. In controlled evaluations on HumanEval, MBPP, a SciCode subset, citation-validation tasks, claim-support auditing, and small end-to-end workflow stress tests, AutoResearch improves execution success, citation validity, local claim support, and workflow completion relative to directly comparable baselines. Code-oriented agents are reported separately as partial comparisons. AutoResearch is intended as a reliability-oriented research assistant, not as a fully autonomous scientist or a standalone manuscript-quality benchmark. Source Code: https://github.com/raja21068/AutoResearch

As LLM-based agents are increasingly interacting in multi-party settings, they need to properly handle information asymmetry, i.e., knowing when and to whom to disclose information is appropriate. Yet, existing benchmarks fail to measure this ability in realistic multi-party settings. Thus, we introduce SOTOPIA-TOM, a multi-dimensional benchmarking framework to evaluate LLM agents' ability to successfully navigate information asymmetric and privacy sensitive multi-party interactions. We create an interaction environment which enables both public (broadcast) and private (direct message) communication, and craft 160 human-reviewed scenarios across eight industry sectors, each involving 3 to 5 agents with partitioned private knowledge and channel-dependent sharing policies. To measure interaction abilities, we create a multi-dimensional evaluation framework to assess how well agents share useful information, seek missing details, coordinate efficiently, and protect privacy, which we also combine into a composite INFOMGMT metric. Results show that, across 6 LLM backbones and prompting strategies (vanilla, CoT-privacy, and ToM-based interventions), even the largest high-reasoning model (GPT-5) reaches only a 62% INFOMGMT score, which indicates persistent deficiencies in information seeking and privacy-aware decision-making. Additionally, ToM-based interventions more consistently improve the overall coordination-privacy balance (for example, relative to the vanilla baseline, ToM-Coach reduces critical privacy violations on GPT-4o from 9.9% to 2.2% while increasing the composite InfoMgmt score more than 2.5x from 15% to 40%). Overall, SOTOPIA-TOM exposes persistent limitations of current LLM agents in complex, information-asymmetric coordination and provides an extensible testbed for developing more privacy-aware, theory-of-mind capable multi-agent systems.

Engineering problem solving is central to real-world decision-making, requiring mathematical formulations that not only represent complex problems but also produce feasible solutions under data and physical constraints. Unlike mathematical problem solving, which operates on predefined formulations, engineering tasks demand open-ended analysis, feasibility-driven modeling, and iterative refinement. Although large language models (LLMs) have shown strong capabilities in reasoning and code generation, they often fail to ensure feasibility, which limits their applicability to engineering problem solving. To address this challenge, we propose EngiAgent, a multi-agent system with a fully connected coordinator that simulates expert workflows through specialized agents for problem analysis, modeling, verification, solving, and solution evaluation. The fully connected coordinator enables flexible feedback routing, overcoming the rigidity of prior pipeline-based reflection methods and ensuring feasibility at every stage of the process. This design not only improves robustness to diverse failure cases such as data extraction errors, constraint inconsistencies, and solver failures, but also enhances the overall quality of problem solving. Empirical results across four representative domains demonstrate that EngiAgent achieves substantial improvements in feasibility compared to prior approaches, establishing a new paradigm for feasibility-oriented engineering problem solving with LLMs. Our source code and data are available at https://github.com/AI4Engi/EngiAgent.

We investigate the belief revision problem in epistemic planning, i.e., what will be the beliefs of all agents in a multi-agent system after an agent gains the belief in some state property. Based on the standard representation in epistemic planning of agents' beliefs via a single multi-agent Kripke model, we generalize the classical AGM belief revision postulates to the multi-agent setting, with the aim to provide a formal framework for evaluating dynamic epistemic reasoning frameworks in which the beliefs of all agents as the result of actions are computed. As an example of a simple operator that satisfies all of the generalized AGM postulates, we present generalized full-meet multi-agent belief revision. We moreover define a generalization of the standard postulates for iterated revision, present a more sophisticated, event model based revision operator, and discuss the potential issues in defining an epistemic operator on Kripke models that can satisfy all of the generalized postulates for iterated multi-agent belief revision.

Language model (LM)-based agents have demonstrated promising capabilities in automating complex tasks from natural language instructions, yet they continue to struggle with long-horizon planning and reasoning. To address this, we propose an enhanced multi-agent framework that decomposes automation into three roles: a planner for high-level decision-making, an actor for task execution, and a memory manager for contextual reasoning. While this modular decomposition aligns with established design patterns, our core contribution lies in a systematic compute-allocation analysis, revealing that planning is the dominant factor influencing task performance. Execution and memory management require significantly less compute and model capacity to achieve competitive results. Building on these insights, we introduce a planner-centric reinforcement learning approach, which exclusively optimizes the planner using trajectory-level rewards from a VLM-as-judge, while freezing the other components. Extensive experiments on benchmarks spanning web navigation, OS control, and tool use demonstrate that concentrating model capacity and learning on high-level planning yields robust and compute-efficient improvements in long-horizon agent automation. Our code is publicly released.

The challenge of engineering autonomous agents capable of navigating the stochastic and adversarial nature of the physical world has historically resided at the intersection of symbolic logic and control theory. Traditional multi-agent system (MAS) frameworks have relied heavily on monolithic logical models -- primarily variations of the event calculus and situation calculus -- to represent action, change, and temporal persistence. While these classical systems provide robust solutions to the frame problem through mechanisms like circumscription and successor state axioms, they are inherently limited by a closed-world assumption that fails in the face of unobserved agent interventions, plan interruptions, and divergent belief-reality states. The paradigm of Sheaf-Theoretic Planning (STP) emerges as a transformative alternative, grounding the problem of multi-agent coordination under the mathematical structures of topos theory and sheaf semantics. This report provides an exhaustive analysis, justification, and extension of the STP framework, exploring its categorical foundations, implementation feasibility, and role in the future of resilient autonomous systems.

Large multimodal model-based Multi-Agent Systems (MASs) enable collaborative complex problem solving through specialized agents. However, MASs are vulnerable to infectious jailbreak, where compromising a single agent can spread to others, leading to widespread compromise. Existing defenses counter this by training a more contagious cure factor, biasing agents to retrieve it over virus adversarial examples (VirAEs). However, this homogenizes agent responses, providing only superficial suppression rather than true recovery. We revisit these defenses, which operate globally via a shared cure factor, while infectious jailbreak arise from localized interaction behaviors. This mismatch limits their effectiveness. To address this, we propose a training-free Foresight-Guided Local Purification (FLP) framework, where each agent reasons over future interactions to track behavioral evolution and eliminate infections. Specifically, each agent simulates future behavioral trajectories over subsequent chat rounds. To reflect diversity in MASs, we introduce a multi-persona simulation strategy for robust prediction across interaction contexts. We then use response diversity as a diagnostic signal to detect infection by analyzing inconsistencies across persona-based predictions at both retrieval-result and semantic levels. For infected agents, we apply localized purification: recent infections are mitigated via immediate album rollback, while long-term infections are handled using Recursive Binary Diagnosis (RBD), which recursively partitions the image album and applies the same diagnosis strategy to localize and eliminate VirAEs. Experiments show that FLP reduces the maximum cumulative infection rate from over 95% to below 5.47%. Moreover, retrieval and semantic metrics closely match benign baselines, indicating effective preservation of interaction diversity.

We introduce an autonomous multiagent framework for mechanistic interpretability that automates both explaining and finding internal features in large language models. The system runs two coupled loops: (1) explanation refinement, where an agent proposes competing hypotheses and iteratively tests them with targeted prompt controls and a multi-metric evaluation; and (2) feature discovery, where an agent generates prompt sets, constructs a k-nearest-neighbor graph in activation space, and retrieves candidate features using statistical separability and semantic coherence criteria. On Gemma-2 family models and MLP neurons in weight-sparse transformers, our agent improves over one-shot auto-interpretations, discovers language-specific and safety-relevant features, and produces auditable explanation traces, showing that agent-driven empirical loops yield sharper and more falsifiable explanations than one-shot labels.

Maintaining reliable UI test suites in large-scale enterprise applications is a persistent and costly challenge. We present an industrial case study of a multi-agent autonomous testing system evaluated using anonymized execution data from a production-like enterprise UI testing prototype. The application features several hundred dynamic UI elements per screen. Built on a large language model with LangGraph orchestration, Playwright execution, and a RAG knowledge base, the system evolves from human-directed testing toward High-autonomy feature discovery and test execution: given no explicit test targets, it discovers over 100 testable features across 10 UI screens, dynamically expands coverage by an additional 15--30 features through runtime DOM analysis, and iteratively repairs failing tests without human intervention. We analyzed 300 consecutive autonomous execution reports encompassing 636 individual test-case executions across 10 distinct scenario families. The system achieved a 70% repair convergence rate at the scenario-family level, with a mean of 3.4 repair iterations to convergence. However, only 10% of scenario families succeeded on first attempt, 38% of reports failed to produce any executable test artifact, and we documented concrete instances of assertion weakening and test-case deletion used as workaround mechanisms to achieve superficial convergence. Our findings show that unrestricted autonomy leads to unstable and often misleading outcomes, while constrained autonomy transforms such systems into operationally viable workflows. Rather than advocating full autonomy, our findings suggest that reliable autonomous testing in enterprise-scale settings requires explicit constraints, validation boundaries, and human oversight to preserve semantic correctness and operational trustworthiness.

Geometric Algebra (GA) presents challenges to learners due to its highly abstract mathematical structure and complex operational rules, as translating algebraic manipulations into concrete geometric interpretations is a non-intuitive process when developing related code. Currently, some existing GA software packages rely on manually written scripts for code generation and visualization, but their high learning curve hinders widespread adoption. Meanwhile, methods based on Large Language Models (LLMs) often produce logical errors when generating specific GA scripts, such as GAALOPScript, resulting in generally low accuracy. To address these issues, this study proposes GA-VisAgent -- a multi-agent interactive learning application for GA code generation and visualization -- building upon a Geometric algebra large language model (GAGPT). Integrating task planning mechanisms with ReAct reasoning strategies, GA-VisAgent can decompose complex operations into five standardized subtasks, including core operations like geometric products, rotations, and reflections. It supports natural language and mathematical formulas as input to automatically generate executable code, accompanied by interactive visualizations to aid user comprehension. Experimental results show that GA-VisAgent achieved a 90% code generation success rate across 40 typical Conformal GA tasks, representing a 70% improvement over GPT-4o. This application introduces an extensible new paradigm for teaching GA and developing visualization tools for related mathematical concepts. The online service for this project will be available at http://gagis.cn/gacrac.

Large language model (LLM)-powered multi-agent systems (MAS) enable agents to communicate and share information, achieving strong performance on complex tasks. However, this communication also creates an attack surface where malicious agents can propagate misinformation and manipulate group decisions, undermining MAS safety. Existing embedding-based defenses aim to detect and prune suspicious agents, but their effectiveness depends on a clear separation between the text embeddings of malicious and benign messages. Attackers can circumvent such defenses by crafting messages whose embeddings lie close to benign ones. We analyze this failure mode theoretically and validate it empirically with three attacks, Slow Drift, Benign Wrapper, and Chaos Seeding. Our analysis further reveals a fundamental limitation of embedding-based defenses: because they rely solely on the text embeddings, they ignore token-level confidence signals such as logits, which can remain informative when embeddings are not distinguishable under attack. We propose using confidence scores to prune or down-weight messages during MAS communication. Experiments show improved robustness across models, datasets, and communication topologies. Moreover, we find that the effectiveness of confidence signals decays over communication rounds, highlighting the importance of early intervention. This insights can inform and inspire future work on MAS attacks and defenses.

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed to generate code for human-centered applications where demographic fairness is critical. However, existing evaluations focus almost exclusively on functional correctness, leaving social bias in LLM-generated code largely unexamined. Extending our prior work on Solar, we conduct a comprehensive empirical study using SocialBias-Bench, a benchmark of 343 real-world coding tasks spanning seven demographic dimensions. We evaluate four prominent LLMs and find severe bias across all models, with Code Bias Scores reaching up to 60.58%. We further show that standard prompt-level interventions, such as Chain-of-Thought reasoning and fairness persona assignment, inadvertently amplify bias rather than reduce it. We then investigate whether structured multi-agent software process frameworks can improve fairness, finding that structured pipelines reduce bias when early roles correctly scope what the code should and should not consider. However, adding explicit fairness instructions to all agent roles produces worse outcomes than providing none, suggesting that diffused responsibility goes unaddressed. To address these limitations, we propose the Fairness Monitor Agent (FMA), a modular component that plugs into any existing code generation pipeline without modifying it. FMA analyzes the task description to determine which attributes should be considered or restricted, then detects and corrects violations through an iterative review process, without requiring an executable test suite. Evaluated on all 343 tasks, FMA reduces bias by 65.1% compared to a developer agent alone and improves functional correctness from 75.80% to 83.97%, outperforming all other studied approaches.

A key challenge for the safety of advanced AI systems is the possibility that multiple simpler agents might inadvertently form a collective agent with capabilities and goals distinct from those of any individual. More generally, determining when a group of agents can be viewed as a unified collective agent is a foundational question in the study of interactions and incentives in both biological and artificial systems. We adopt a behavioral perspective in answering this question, ascribing collective agency to a group when viewing the group's joint actions as rational and goal-directed successfully predicts its behavior. We formalize this perspective on collective agency using causal games -- which are causal models of strategic, multi-agent interactions -- and causal abstraction -- which formalizes when a simple, high-level model faithfully captures a more complex, low-level model. We use this framework to solve a puzzle regarding multi-agent incentives in actor-critic models and to make quantitative assessments of the degree of collective agency exhibited by different voting mechanisms. Our framework aims to provide a foundation for theoretical and empirical work to understand, predict, and control emergent collective agents in multi-agent AI systems.

Collective intelligence emerges across biological, physical, and artificial systems without central coordination, yet a unifying principle governing such behaviour remains elusive. The Free Energy Principle explains how individual agents adapt through variational inference, while game theory formalises strategic interactions. Here we introduce the Game-Theoretic Free Energy Principle, a unified framework showing that multi-agent systems performing local free-energy minimisation implicitly implement a stochastic game. We prove that, under bounded rationality and local information constraints, stationary points of collective free energy correspond to approximate Nash equilibria of an induced game. Conversely, a broad class of cooperative games admits a variational representation in which equilibria arise as Gibbs distributions over coalitions, establishing a bridge between Bayesian inference and strategic interaction. To characterise higher-order effects, we introduce a free-energy formulation of the Harsanyi dividend, isolating irreducible multi-agent synergy. This yields a predictive theory of cooperation, including a falsifiable non-monotonic relationship between sensory precision and agent influence. We validate this prediction across neural, biological, and artificial multi-agent systems. These results identify a common variational principle underlying inference, thermodynamics, and game-theoretic equilibrium.

Recent advances in agentic AI are shifting automation from discrete tools to proactive multi-agent systems that coordinate multi-specialized capabilities behind unified interfaces. However, today's agent systems typically rely on hard-coded agent architectures with fixed roles, coordination patterns, and interaction flows that limit end-user personalization and make adaptation to individual needs and contexts difficult. Given this limitation, we argue that on-demand persona-based agent generation offers a promising path towards more efficient and contextually appropriate interaction within agentic workflows. By dynamically crafting agents and personas at run-time to match user characteristics, task demands, and workflow context, agentic platforms can move beyond one-size-fits-all configurations. We present a pipeline for on-demand persona generation in agentic platforms, detailing how real-time crafting of AI personas can be systematically integrated within agent systems, aiming to open new possibilities in agentic platform design paradigms.

Across millennia, complex societies have faced the same coordination problem of how to organize collective action among cognitively bounded and informationally incomplete individuals. Different civilizations developed different political institutions to answer the same basic questions of who proposes, who reviews, who executes, and how errors are corrected. We argue that multi-agent systems built on large language models face the same challenge. Their central problem is not only individual intelligence, but collective organization. Historical institutions therefore provide a structured design space for multi-agent architectures, making key trade-offs between efficiency and error correction, centralization and distribution, and specialization and redundancy empirically testable. We translate seven historical political institutions, spanning four canonical governance patterns, into executable multi-agent architectures and evaluate them under identical conditions across three large language models and two benchmarks. We find that governance topology strongly shapes collective performance. Within a single model, the gap between the best and worst institution exceeds 57 percentage points, while the optimal architecture shifts systematically with model capability and task characteristics. These results suggest that collective intelligence will not advance through a single optimal organizational form, but through governance mechanisms that can be reselected and reconfigured as tasks and capabilities evolve. More broadly, this points to a transition from \textbf{self-evolving agents} to the \textbf{self-evolving multi-agent system}. The code is available on \href{https://github.com/cf3i/SocialSystemArena}{GitHub}.

People commonly leverage structured content to accelerate knowledge acquisition and research problem solving. Among these, roadmaps guide researchers through hierarchical subtasks to solve complex research problems step by step. Despite progress in structured content generation, the roadmap generation task has remained unexplored. To bridge this gap, we introduce RoadMap, a novel benchmark designed to evaluate the ability of large language models (LLMs) to construct high-quality roadmaps for solving complex research problems. Based on this, we identify three limitations of LLMs: (1) lack of professional knowledge, (2) unreasonable task decomposition, and (3) disordered logical relationships. To address these challenges, we propose RoadMapper, an LLM-based multi-agent system that decomposes the research roadmap generation task into three key stages (i.e., initial generation, knowledge augmentation, and iterative "critique-revise-evaluate"). Extensive experiments demonstrate that RoadMapper can improve LLMs' ability for roadmap generation, while enhancing average performance by more than 8% and saving 84% of the time required by human experts, highlighting its effectiveness and application potential.

Reasoning over heterogeneous artifacts (PDFs, spreadsheets, slide decks, etc.) increasingly occurs within structured agent workflows that iteratively extract, transform, and reference external information. In these workflows, uncertainty is not merely an input-quality issue: it can redirect decomposition and routing decisions, reshape intermediate state, and produce qualitatively different execution trajectories. We study this phenomenon by treating uncertainty as a controlled variable: we inject structured perturbations into artifact-derived representations, execute fixed workflows under comprehensive logging, and quantify contamination via trace divergence in plans, tool invocations, and intermediate state. Across 614 paired runs on 32 GAIA tasks with three different language models, we find a decoupling: workflows may diverge substantially yet recover correct answers, or remain structurally similar while producing incorrect outputs. We characterize three manifestation types: silent semantic corruption, behavioral detours with recovery, and combined structural disruption and their control-flow signatures (rerouting, extended execution, early termination). We measure operational costs and characterize why commonly used verification guardrails fail to intercept contamination. We contribute (i) a formal taxonomy of contamination manifestations in structured workflows, (ii) a trace-based measurement framework for detecting and localizing contamination across agent interactions, and (iii) empirical evidence with implications for targeted verification, defensive design, and cost control.

As large language model (LLM) agents are deployed in high-stakes environments, the question of how safely to delegate subtasks to specialized sub-agents becomes critical. Existing work addresses multi-agent architecture selection at design time or provides broad empirical guidelines, but neither provides a runtime mechanism that dynamically adjusts the safety-efficiency trade-off as task context changes during execution. We propose Safe Bilevel Delegation (SBD), a formal framework for runtime delegation safety in hierarchical multi-agent systems. SBD formulates task delegation as a bilevel optimization problem: an outer meta-weight network phi learns context-dependent safety-efficiency weights lambda(s) in [0,1]; an inner loop optimizes the delegation policy pi subject to a probabilistic safety constraint P(safe) >= 1-delta. The continuous delegation degree alpha in [0, 1] controls how much decision authority is transferred to each sub-agent, interpolating smoothly between full human override (alpha=0) and fully autonomous execution (alpha=1). We establish three theoretical results: (1) Safety Monotonicity--higher outer safety weight produces a weakly safer inner policy; (2) Inner Policy Convergence--projected gradient descent on the inner problem converges linearly under standard smoothness assumptions; (3) an Accountability Propagation bound that distributes responsibility across multi-hop delegation chains with a provable per-agent ceiling. We instantiate SBD in three high-stakes domains--medical AI (MIMIC-III), financial risk control (S and P 500), and educational agent supervision (ASSISTments)--specifying datasets, safety constraint sets, baselines, and evaluation protocols. This manuscript presents the formal framework and theoretical results in full; empirical validation following the protocols described herein is planned and will be reported in a forthcoming revision.

The purpose of our paper is to develop a unified multi-agent architecture that automates end-to-end machine learning (ML) pipeline generation from datasets and natural-language (NL) goals, improving efficiency, robustness and explainability. A five-agent system is proposed to handle profiling, intent parsing, microservice recommendation, Directed Acyclic Graph (DAG) construction and execution. It integrates code-grounded Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) for microservice understanding, an explainable hybrid recommender combining multiple criteria, a self-healing mechanism using Large Language Model (LLM)-based error interpretation and adaptive learning from execution history. The approach is evaluated on 150 ML tasks across diverse scenarios. The system achieves an 84.7% end-to-end pipeline success rate, outperforming baseline methods. It demonstrates improved robustness through self-healing and reduces workflow development time compared to manual construction. The study introduces a novel integration of code-grounded RAG, explainable recommendation, self-healing execution and adaptive learning within a single architecture, showing that tightly coupled intelligent components can outperform isolated solutions.

Mobile agent systems are emerging as a key paradigm for enabling intelligent applications on edge devices and in AIoT ecosystems. However, their scalability is fundamentally constrained by limited on-device computation and fragmented intelligence across devices. In this work, we propose a unified research agenda for scaling mobile agent systems along two complementary dimensions: (1) improving capability density of individual agents through compact foundation model design and compression, and (2) enabling collective intelligence via communication-rich multi-agent collaboration. Building on recent model and infrastructure advances, this vision aims to transform isolated mobile agents into a distributed intelligent system that is efficient and scalable.

Multi-agent deliberation systems using large language models (LLMs) are increasingly proposed for policy simulation, yet they suffer from artificial consensus: evaluator agents converge on the same option regardless of their assigned value perspectives. We present the AI Council, a three-phase deliberation framework, and conduct 120 deliberations across two policy scenarios to test two interventions. First, architectural heterogeneity (assigning a different 7-9B parameter model to each value perspective) significantly reduces first-choice concentration compared to a homogeneous baseline (child welfare: 70.9% to 46.1%, p < 0.001, r = 0.58; housing: 46.0% to 22.9%, p < 0.001, r = 0.50). This contrasts with accuracy-oriented multi-agent debate, where heterogeneity does not reduce convergence, suggesting model diversity operates differently when no objectively correct answer exists. Second, coherence validation (using a frontier model to assess whether each evaluator's reasoning is grounded in its assigned values) reveals a fidelity-diversity tradeoff: on a scenario with a dominant option, it further reduces concentration (46.1% to 40.8%, p = 0.004), but on a scenario with genuinely competitive options, it increases concentration (22.9% to 26.6%, p = 0.96) by amplifying high-coherence evaluators who cluster on one option. This tradeoff may be a general property of multi-agent systems employing quality weighting. We report negative results from three failed Delphi designs, demonstrate that 8B models exhibit binary rather than graded responses to counter-arguments, and propose the trustworthy tension rate as a diagnostic measure of small-model deliberation capabilities.

In multi-agent systems, should limited resources be concentrated into a few capable agents or distributed among many simpler ones? This work formulates the split over $n$ resource sharing problem where a group of $n$ agents equally shares a common resource (e.g., monetary budget, computational resources, physical size). We present a case study in multi-agent coverage where the area of the disk-shaped footprint of agents scales as $1/n$. A formal analysis reveals that the initial coverage rate grows with $n$. However, if the speed of agents decreases proportionally with their radii, groups of all sizes perform equally well, whereas if it decreases proportionally with their footprints, a single agent performs best. We also present computer simulations in which resource splitting increases the failure rates of individual agents. The models and findings help identify optimal distributiveness levels and inform the design of multi-agent systems under resource constraints.

Autonomous agents acting in realistic Multi-Agent Systems (MAS) should be able to adapt during their execution. Standard strategic logics, such as Alternating-time Temporal Logic (ATL), model agents' state- or history-dependent behaviour. However, the dynamic treatment of agents' available actions and their knowledge of required actions is still rarely addressed. In this paper, we introduce ATL with Dynamic Actions (ATL-D), which models the process of granting and revoking actions, and its extension ATEL-D, which captures how such updates affect agents' knowledge. Beyond the conceptual contribution, we provide several technical results: we analyse the expressivity of our logic in relation to ATL, study its relation to normative systems, and provide complexity results for relevant computational problems.

Recursive or looped language models have recently emerged as a new scaling axis by iteratively refining the same model computation over latent states to deepen reasoning. We extend such scaling principle from a single model to multi-agent systems, and ask: Can agent collaboration itself be scaled through recursion? To this end, we introduce RecursiveMAS, a recursive multi-agent framework that casts the entire system as a unified latent-space recursive computation. RecursiveMAS connects heterogeneous agents as a collaboration loop through the lightweight RecursiveLink module, enabling in-distribution latent thoughts generation and cross-agent latent state transfer. To optimize our framework, we develop an inner-outer loop learning algorithm for iterative whole-system co-optimization through shared gradient-based credit assignment across recursion rounds. Theoretical analyses of runtime complexity and learning dynamics establish that RecursiveMAS is more efficient than standard text-based MAS and maintains stable gradients during recursive training. Empirically, we instantiate RecursiveMAS under 4 representative agent collaboration patterns and evaluate across 9 benchmarks spanning mathematics, science, medicine, search, and code generation. In comparison with advanced single/multi-agent and recursive computation baselines, RecursiveMAS consistently delivers an average accuracy improvement of 8.3%, together with 1.2$\times$-2.4$\times$ end-to-end inference speedup, and 34.6%-75.6% token usage reduction. Code and Data are provided in https://recursivemas.github.io.

As LLM applications grow more complex, developers are increasingly adopting multi-agent architectures to decompose workflows into specialized, collaborative components, introducing structure that constrains agent behavior and exposes useful semantic predictability. Unlike traditional LLM serving, which operates under highly dynamic and uncertain conditions, this structured topology enables opportunities to reduce runtime uncertainty$\unicode{x2015}$yet existing systems fail to exploit it, treating agentic workloads as generic traffic and incurring significant inefficiencies. Our analysis of production traces from an agent-serving platform and an internal coding assistant reveals key bottlenecks, including low prefix cache hit rates, severe resource contention from long-context requests, and substantial queuing delays due to suboptimal scaling. To address these challenges, we propose Pythia, a multi-agent serving system that captures workflow semantics through a simple interface at the serving layer, unlocking new optimization opportunities and substantially improving throughput and job completion time over state-of-the-art baselines.

Deploying production-ready multi-agent systems (MAS) in complex industrial environments remains challenging due to limitations in scalability, observability, and autonomous evolution. We present OxyGent, an open-source framework driven by two core novelties: a unified Oxy abstraction and the OxyBank evolution engine. The unified abstraction encapsulates agents, tools, LLMs, and reasoning flows as pluggable atomic components, enabling Lego-like scalable system composition and non-intrusive monitoring. To enhance observability, OxyGent introduces permission-driven dynamic planning that replaces rigid workflows with execution graphs generated at runtime, providing adaptive visualizations. Furthermore, to support continuous evolution, OxyBank serves as an AI asset management platform that drives automated data backflow, annotation, and joint evolution. Empirical evaluations and real-world case studies show that OxyGent provides a robust and scalable foundation for MAS. OxyGent is fully open-sourced under the Apache License 2.0 at https://github.com/jd-opensource/OxyGent.

Formal models for concurrent and distributed systems describe machines; the people who operate them are either ignored or treated as external environment. Yet, key distributed systems -- notably grassroots platforms -- include people operating their personal machines (smartphones), and their faithful description must include the states of both people and machines and how they jointly effect system behaviour. Here, we propose volition-guarded multiagent atomic transactions -- executed atomically by machines and guarded by their people's volitions -- as a novel mathematical foundation for specifying systems consisting of people operating machines. Each agent's state consists of a volitional state and machine state; a transaction is enabled when the machine precondition holds and the guarding persons are willing. For example, befriending two people is guarded by both; unfriending, by either; voluntary swap of coins and bonds is guarded by both parties, while a payment is guarded by the payer. We develop the mathematical machinery to express safety and liveness of platforms specified in this framework, to implement one platform by another, and for an implementation to be resilient to faults; and provide example specifications of two grassroots platforms: social networks, and coins and bonds. These specifications are then used by AI to derive working implementations. We employ here a novel and simpler definition of `grassroots' that better captures the informal notion -- multiple instances can form and operate independently, yet may coalesce -- and show that the platforms specified here are grassroots under the new definition. We further introduce \emph{volitionally grassroots} protocols, in which two groups can become connected only by mutual consent -- the first transaction coupling them must be willed by a member of each -- and show that both platforms are volitionally grassroots.

Language Model (LM)-based agents remain largely untested in mixed-motive settings where agents must leverage short-term cooperation for long-term competitive goals (e.g., multi-party politics). We introduce Cooperate to Compete (C2C), a multi-agent environment where players can engage in private negotiations while competing to be the first to achieve their secret objective. Players have asymmetric objectives and negotiations are non-binding, allowing alliances to form and break as players' short-term interests align and diverge. We run AI only games and conduct a user study pitting human players against AI opponents. We identify significant differences between human and AI negotiation behaviors, finding that humans favor lower-complexity deals and are significantly less reliable partners compared to LM-based agents. We also find that humans are more aggressive negotiators, accepting deals without a counteroffer only 56.3% of the time compared to 67.6% for LM-based agents. Through targeted prompting inspired by these findings, we modify agents' negotiation behavior and improve win rates from 22.2% to 32.7%. We run over 1,100 games with over 16,000 private conversations totaling 15.2 million tokens and over 150,000 player actions. Our results establish C2C as a testbed for studying and building LM-based agents that can navigate the sophisticated coordination required for real-world deployments. The game, code, and dataset may be found at https://negotiationgame.io/c2c.

While diffusion models generate high-fidelity video clips, transforming them into coherent storytelling engines remains challenging. Current agentic pipelines automate this via chained modules but suffer from semantic drift and cascading failures due to independent, handcrafted prompting. We present Co-Director, a hierarchical multi-agent framework formalizing video storytelling as a global optimization problem. To ensure semantic coherence, we introduce hierarchical parameterization: a multi-armed bandit globally identifies promising creative directions, while a local multimodal self-refinement loop mitigates identity drift and ensures sequence-level consistency. This balances the exploration of novel narrative strategies with the exploitation of effective creative configurations. For evaluation, we introduce GenAD-Bench, a 400-scenario dataset of fictional products for personalized advertising. Experiments demonstrate that Co-Director significantly outperforms state-of-the-art baselines, offering a principled approach that seamlessly generalizes to broader cinematic narratives. Project Page: https://co-director-agent.github.io/

Deep Learning methods are becoming prominent in automated software bug detection; however, they lack the global understanding of the given code. Consequently, their performance tends to degrade, especially when they are applied to large interconnected code bases or complex modular programs. Recently, Large Language Models (LLMs) have proven to be effective at capturing dependencies among multiple interconnected modules in the codebase. This motivated us to propose the Flow-Graph-Driven Multi-Agent Framework (FGDM), which is composed of four agents that operate in a sequential manner. The framework converts the received code to a flow graph, identifies the erroneous segments, and further generates the repaired code. All the employed agents utilize Chain-of-Thought (COT) and Tree-of-Thoughts (TOT) prompts. Additionally, we also integrated with the FAISS vector database to retrieve similar previous bugs and their repairs. We demonstrated the efficacy of the proposed framework over 100 programs from several projects, including Ansible, Black, FastAPI, Keras, Luigi, Matplotlib, Pandas, Scrapy, SpaCy, and Tornado in both C and Python programs. Our experiments demonstrate that the FGDM outperforms the extant approaches and yielded reductions with a mean of 24.33 and 8.37 in Levenshtein distance and similarities of 0.951 and 0.974 in cosine similarity for Python and C, respectively.

The rapid integration of Large Language Models (LLMs) into Multi-Agent Systems (MAS) has significantly enhanced their collaborative problem-solving capabilities, but it has also expanded their attack surfaces, exposing them to vulnerabilities such as prompt infection and compromised inter-agent communication. While emerging graph-based anomaly detection methods show promise in protecting these networks, the field currently lacks a standardized, reproducible environment to train these models and evaluate their efficacy. To address this gap, we introduce Gammaf (Graph-based Anomaly Monitoring for LLM Multi-Agent systems Framework), an open-source benchmarking platform. Gammaf is not a novel defense mechanism itself, but rather a comprehensive evaluation architecture designed to generate synthetic multi-agent interaction datasets and benchmark the performance of existing and future defense models. The proposed framework operates through two interdependent pipelines: a Training Data Generation stage, which simulates debates across varied network topologies to capture interactions as robust attributed graphs, and a Defense System Benchmarking stage, which actively evaluates defense models by dynamically isolating flagged adversarial nodes during live inference rounds. Through rigorous evaluation using established defense baselines (XG-Guard and BlindGuard) across multiple knowledge tasks (such as MMLU-Pro and GSM8K), we demonstrate Gammaf's high utility, topological scalability, and execution efficiency. Furthermore, our experimental results reveal that equipping an LLM-MAS with effective attack remediation not only recovers system integrity but also substantially reduces overall operational costs by facilitating early consensus and cutting off the extensive token generation typical of adversarial agents.

Large language model tutors are easy to build in a notebook and hard to run in a real course. We describe ITAS (Intelligent Teaching Assistant System), a multi-agent tutoring system that a graduate quantum computing course used for a semester at Old Dominion University. The system has three layers. The teaching layer is a Spoke-and-Wheel of three parallel specialist agents (Video, Code, Guidance) followed by a Synthesizer, plus a separate autograder that evaluates both the correctness and the approach of checkpoint submissions. The operational layer is four Cloud Run microservices with session state in Cloud SQL and interaction events streamed through Pub/Sub to BigQuery. The feedback layer is a narrow-scope conversational agent that answers instructor questions over per-lesson pseudonymized event streams, addressing what we call the Blind Instructor Problem: LLM tutors accumulate more data about students than the instructor can reach through routine channels. The architecture is a direct response to specific failures of an earlier prototype, and we describe which of those fixes carried forward and which were dropped for this iteration. We report on a pilot deployment (five students, one course, one semester) interpreted as system-behavior evidence rather than learning-outcome evidence: the teaching layer handled 334 chat turns without the task-boundary hallucinations that domain consolidation would have risked, the operational layer captured 10,628 events across five modules, and the feedback layer surfaced two findings the instructor acted on mid-semester. We do not claim the pilot generalizes. We do claim that the system as described is one workable answer to the question of what an LLM-based ITS needs to look like end-to-end to run in a real course.

We present QED, an open-source multi-agent system that turns human-provided research questions into complete mathematical proofs without further human guidance. Its pipeline is designed to overcome common failures of single-query proof generation by separating planning, proving, and verification: a decomposition agent structures the proof search, prover agents generate candidate arguments, and verifier agents check correctness. In collaboration with domain experts, we evaluated QED on 18 research-level projects of varying difficulty. QED produced five original works across algebraic geometry, fluid PDEs, probability, and inverse problems. Expert assessments regard these works as solid specialized research contributions, with three comparable in difficulty and scope to work commonly published in established specialist mathematics venues. QED is released at https://github.com/proofQED/QED.

We introduce GamEDAI, a hierarchical multi-agent framework that transforms instructor-provided questions into fully playable, pedagogically grounded educational games validated through formal mechanic contracts. Built on phase-based LangGraph sub-graphs, deterministic Quality Gates, and structured Pydantic schemas, GamEDAI supports two template families encompassing 15 interaction mechanics across spatial reasoning, procedural execution, and higher-order Bloom's Taxonomy objectives. Evaluated on 200 questions spanning five subject domains, the system achieves a 90% validation pass rate, 98.3% schema compliance, and 73% token reduction over ReAct agents (${\sim}$73,500 $\rightarrow$ ${\sim}$19,900 tokens/game) at $0.46 per game. Within this model configuration, these results suggest that phase-bounded architectural structure correlates more strongly with alignment quality than prompting strategy alone. Our demonstration lets attendees generate Bloom's-aligned games from natural language in under 60 seconds, inspect Quality Gate outputs at each pipeline phase, and browse a curated library of 50 games spanning all 15 mechanic types.

Multimodal artificial intelligence models for endometrial cancer (EC) risk stratification typically optimize aggregate predictive performance but provide limited mechanisms for enforcing mandatory guideline overrides, such as assigning POLE-mutated tumors to the low-risk group despite high-grade morphology. We present EndoGov, a two-tier multi-agent expert system that factorizes the decision process as D(x) = G(P(x), R), where specialist agents P extract structured evidence and a governance agent G applies an executable rule set R. Tier 1 comprises pathology, molecular, and clinical agents that independently generate schema-constrained reports from frozen foundation-model features or structured records. Tier 2 queries an evidence-level-weighted Guideline Knowledge Graph, using deterministic hard-path rules for high-priority overrides and constrained soft-path reasoning for ambiguous cases. In TCGA-UCEC (n=541), EndoGov achieved 0.943 accuracy, 0.973 macro AUC, and a conditional logic-violation rate (C-LVR) of 0.93% among trigger-exposed cases. In CPTAC-UCEC (n=95), where reference labels are guideline-derived, EndoGov reached 0.842 accuracy compared with < 0.31 for locked-transfer neural baselines, supporting governance-pathway transfer under distribution shift rather than validation against independent clinical truth. End-to-end safety decomposition localized residual failures primarily to upstream molecular detection rather than downstream governance. Backend-swap experiments further showed that hard-path compliance is invariant to the LLM backend. These findings indicate that explicit clinical-rule governance can provide guideline-compliant, auditable EC risk assignment while preserving competitive discrimination.

Recent advances in autonomous driving have motivated research on pedestrian intention prediction, which aims to infer future crossing decisions and actions by modeling temporal dynamics, social interactions, and environmental context. However, existing studies remain constrained by oversimplified multi-agent interaction patterns, opaque reasoning logic, and a lack of global consistency in behavioral predictions, which compromise both robustness and interpretability. In this work, we propose ESIA (Energy-based Spatiotemporal Interaction-Aware framework), a novel Conditional Random Field (CRF)-based paradigm. We cast the intention prediction task as a structured prediction problem over a unified graph-based representation, treating pedestrians and the environment as spatiotemporal nodes. To characterize their distinct roles, we assign unary potentials to nodes to capture individual intentions, and pairwise potentials to edges to encode social and environmental interactions. These potentials are integrated into a unified global energy function to ensure scene-level consistency across behavioral predictions. To further constrain inference without ground-truth supervision, we introduce structural consistency terms to penalize logical contradictions. This optimization is efficiently solved via a novel Unary-Seeded Simulated Annealing (U-SSA) algorithm, which leverages high-confidence unary priors to rapidly converge to a high-quality solution. Extensive experiments on standard benchmarks demonstrate that ESIA achieves state-of-the-art performance with improved interpretability over existing methods.

Collusion among autonomous agents poses a critical security threat in embodied multi-agent systems (MAS), where coordinated behaviors can deviate from global objectives and lead to real-world consequences. Existing defenses, primarily based on identity control or post-hoc behavior analysis, are insufficient to address such threats in embodied settings due to delayed feedback and noisy observations in physical environments, which make behavioral deviations difficult to detect accurately and in a timely manner. To address this challenge, we propose a mutagenic incentive intervention approach that mitigates collusion by reshaping agents' payoff structures. By rewarding agents who report collusive behavior and penalizing identified participants, the mechanism induces strategic defection and renders collusion unstable. We further design supporting mechanisms, including reporting deposits, smart contract-based reward enforcement, and encrypted communication, to ensure robustness against misuse of the incentive mechanism and retaliation from penalized agents. We implement the proposed approach in both simulated and real-world embodied environments. Experimental results show that our method effectively suppresses collusion by inducing defection, while preserving system efficiency. It achieves performance comparable to the non-collusion baseline and outperforms representative reactive defenses, thereby fulfilling the desired security objectives. These results demonstrate the effectiveness of proactive incentive design as a practical paradigm for securing embodied multi-agent systems.

Multi-agent systems (MAS), composed of networks of two or more autonomous AI agents, have become increasingly popular in production deployments, yet introduce security risks that do not arise in single-agent settings. Even if individual agents exhibit robust security, architectural decisions governing their coordination can create attack surfaces that have not been systematically characterized. In this work, we present an empirical study of how MAS design decisions shape the tradeoff between task performance and attack resistance. Across three agentic environments (browser, desktop, and code) and 13 architectural configurations, we use stagewise evaluations that distinguish planning refusal, execution-stage interception, partial harmful execution, and successful attack completion to study three key design choices: (i) agent roles, which determine how authority and responsibility are allocated; (ii) communication topology, which shapes how and when agents interact; and (iii) memory, which determines the context and state visibility accessible to each agent. We find that multi-agent architectures are more vulnerable than standalone agents in the majority of configurations, with attack success rates varying by up to 3.8x at comparable or higher benign accuracy, and that no single design is universally safer. These results motivate the development of further evaluations that move beyond the security properties of a single agent.

Refereeing is vital in sports, where fair, accurate, and explainable decisions are fundamental. While intelligent assistant technologies are being widely adopted in soccer refereeing, current AI-assisted approaches remain preliminary. Existing research mostly focuses on isolated video perception tasks and lacks the ability to understand and reason about foul scenarios. To fill this gap, we propose SoccerRef-Agents, a holistic and explainable multi-agent decision-making framework for soccer refereeing. The main contributions are: (i) constructing the multimodal benchmark SoccerRefBench with over 1,200 referee theory questions and 600 foul video clips; (ii) building a vector-based knowledge base RefKnowledgeDB using the latest "Laws of the Game" and a classic case database for precise, knowledge-driven reasoning; (iii) designing a novel multi-agent architecture that collaborates via cross-modal RAG to bridge the semantic gap between visual content and regulatory texts. This work explores the technical capability of integrating MLLMs with refereeing expertise, and evaluations show our system significantly outperforms general-purpose MLLMs in decision accuracy and explanation quality. All databases, benchmarks, and code will be made available.

We present Code Broker, a multi agent system built on Google s Agent Development Kit ADK that analyses Python source code from individual files, local directory trees, or remote GitHub repositories and generates structured, actionable quality assessment reports. The system realises a hierarchical five agent architecture in which a root orchestrator coordinates a sequential pipeline agent that, in turn, dispatches three specialised agents concurrently a Correctness Assessor, a Style Assessor, and a Description Generator before synthesising their findings through an Improvement Recommender. Reports quantify four quality dimensions correctness, security, style, and maintainability on a normalised scale and are rendered in both Markdown and HTML for integration into diverse developer workflows. Code Broker fuses LLM based semantic reasoning with deterministic static analysis signals from Pylint, employs asynchronous execution with exponential backoff retry logic to improve robustness under transient API failures, and explores lightweight session memory for retaining and querying prior assessment context across runs. We frame this paper as a technical report on system design, prompt engineering, and tool orchestration, and present a preliminary qualitative evaluation on representative Python codebases of varying scale. The results indicate that parallel specialised agents produce readable, developer oriented feedback that complements traditional linting, while also foregrounding current limitations in evaluation depth, security tooling, large repository handling, and the exclusive reliance on in memory persistence. All code and reproducibility materials are publicly available: https://github.com/Samir-atra/agents_intensive_dev.

Failure attribution, i.e., identifying the responsible agent and decisive step of a failure, is particularly challenging in LLM-based multi-agent systems (MAS) due to their natural-language reasoning, nondeterministic outputs, and intricate interaction dynamics. A reliable benchmark is therefore essential to guide and evaluate attribution techniques. Yet existing benchmarks rely on partially observable traces that capture only agent outputs, omitting the inputs and context that developers actually use when debugging. We argue that failure attribution should be studied under full execution observability, aligning with real-world developer-facing scenarios where complete traces, rather than only outputs, are accessible for diagnosis. To this end, we introduce TraceElephant, a benchmark designed for failure attribution with full execution traces and reproducible environments. We then systematically evaluate failure attribution techniques across various configurations. Specifically, full traces improve attribution accuracy by up to 76% over a partial-observation counterpart, confirming that missing inputs obscure many failure causes. TraceElephant provides a foundation for follow-up failure attribution research, promoting evaluation practices that reflect real-world debugging and supporting the development of more transparent MASs.