Multi-Agent LLM Systems

The evolution of customer support systems is rapidly advancing with agentic chatbots, yet these systems face significant limitations when accessing enterprise data without predefined API endpoints. This paper presents SAFAARI (Schema-Aware Framework for Accelerated Advertiser Response Intelligence), a multi-agent framework that addresses the critical bottleneck of schema linking in Natural Language to SQL (NL-to-SQL) systems through specialized content, metadata, and orchestration agents. We also introduce SEAL (Schema Evaluation and Accuracy in Language-to-SQL), a novel composite metric that holistically evaluates system performance while penalizing inconsistent results. Through systematic experimentation with five feature set configurations, SAFAARI achieves an 81.66% SEAL score (6.65% improvement over baseline), with notable gains in datapoint accuracy (5.51%) and schema-linking precision (4.69%). The framework's effectiveness is validated through human-in-the-loop evaluation with domain experts, which proves its adaptability across diverse support domains. By automating the labor-intensive process of schema linking and query generation, our framework demonstrates 8x reduction in development time while maintaining high accuracy. The solution streamlines API development and enhances self-service capabilities, particularly benefiting customer support enterprises with complex data ecosystems.

Multi-agent LLM systems can be attacked by a payload that no single agent ever holds in full: a poisoned tool hides encrypted fragments in its observations, spreads them across several agents, and an external step reassembles and executes them after the run. Per-step safety checks that judge each action in isolation may fail to recognize the complete distributed payload. We investigate how early such an attack can be detected while the run is still unfolding, and how robustly it can be caught once its most obvious cues are stripped away. We build a working instance on a hierarchical multi-agent system, run it under benign and attacked conditions across five language models and two task domains, and record when each fragment is injected and when the payload is assembled and executed. Detection is a race against assembly. Before the first fragment is injected, attacked and benign runs are indistinguishable; once injection begins, a prefix detector flags $99.3\%$ of successful attacks with a median of five steps remaining and a $10.3\%$ safe-run false-positive rate. Because assembly occurs only after the run, these alarms arrive in time to abort nearly every successful attack. We then measure how much of that warning rests on removable surface cues of the attack rather than on its distributed structure. Generic zero-shot and behavior-trained detectors provide almost no warning at all; the detectors that do work lean in part on removable surface cues, chiefly the ciphertext's length and entropy, and once the entropy cue is removed from the payload and the length features from the detector, detection arrives later and transfers poorly across domains, though a fine-tuned model recovers some of the loss.

Agentic search enables large language models to solve knowledge-intensive tasks by interleaving multi-step reasoning with retrieval, yet optimizing this with outcome-based reinforcement learning (RL) provides only sparse supervision. Knowledge distillation can supply denser guidance, and advanced proprietary models with their strong reasoning capabilities are promising teachers. While distilling from proprietary models can densify this supervisory signal, conventional logit-matching is precluded by hidden logits and mismatched tokenizers, whereas raw natural language trajectory imitation transfers superficial stylistic artifacts rather than core reasoning competence. To address the heterogeneous distillation problem and bridge the distribution gap, we propose Multi-Agent Protocol Distillation (MAPD), a joint distillation and RL framework uses a structured, style-normalized protocol as an intermediate representation. An offline multi-agent system (MAS) decomposes each query, retrieves supporting evidence, repairs failed searches, and converts the resulting exploration trace into a JSON protocol containing the task type, reasoning plan, and extractive grounding facts. During training, the protocol is provided only to a privileged branch of the student policy, whose token distributions furnish a dense distillation signal alongside the sparse RL objective. Extensive evaluations across seven QA benchmarks demonstrate that MAPD consistently outperforms competitive distillation and RL, achieving average success rates of 39.4% on Qwen3-1.7B and 44.4% on Qwen3-4B. Crucially, the framework generalizes robustly across diverse proprietary teachers while effectively mitigating the student policy from style drift and verbosity degeneration.

Recent industry practice has seen the rapid emergence of agentic systems composed of heterogeneous, tool- and LLM-mediated agent components, raising practical questions about inter-agent coordination and protocol design. This paper presents an implementation-grounded comparison of the Model Context Protocol (MCP) and the Agent2Agent (A2A) protocol, from a multi-agent systems engineering perspective, using an inter-agent coordination scenario involving LLM-based agents. We evaluate an MCP-based and an A2A-based multi-agent implementation of the same software engineering task against a set of requirements derived from prior literature and discussions with industry partners, including agent discoverability, multi-part messaging, multi-turn conversations, asynchronous communication, observability, interoperability, and access control. The results evidence that MCP can support inter-agent coordination in constrained LLM-based systems through a comparatively lightweight implementation model with lower coordination complexity, although coordination concerns such as conversational state management and task lifecycle handling must be implemented explicitly at the application layer. In contrast, A2A provides richer native support for stateful, multi-turn coordination through protocol-level abstractions for tasks and lifecycle management, but this comes with substantially greater implementation and coordination complexity. Given the narrow scope of the evaluated coordination pattern, these findings are presented as design observations from an empirical experience report rather than general claims of protocol suitability or superiority across broader classes of MAS, highlighting trade-offs and how protocol abstractions shape the distribution of coordination responsibilities in contemporary agentic systems.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have significantly automated the process of scientific discovery over the past few years. However, existing systems share one core limitation: they generate and optimize ideas independently for either Quality or Diversity. This often leads to the generation of ideas in close proximity to one another or to a large set of trivial, unsound, or unclear concepts. In this work, we instead argue that research ideation should be treated as a conjunction of both objectives and framed as a Quality-Diversity (QD) search. In line with this perspective, we introduce IDEAgent, a multi-agent framework that manages the evolution of ideas through lineages. We jointly drive Quality using multi-objective feedback for dedicated repair and refinement, while Diversity is achieved through lightweight sequential memory and explicit comparison against completed ideas, their historical ancestors, and rejected proposals. To systematically evaluate this QD conjunction, we develop Yield, a joint metric that computes the largest set of mutually diverse ideas that satisfy a predetermined quality threshold. Finally, through evaluations across 32 topics spanning 8 domains of Computer Science, we show that IDEAgent outperforms the best baseline by 3.89x on Yield, while achieving non-zero Yield on 8x more topics. We further corroborate these findings through an analysis of quality improvements, showing that repair and refinement are crucial for building logical rigor and clarity while preserving non-obviousness. To encourage future research on QD-search-based ideation, we open-source IDEAgent at https://github.com/declare-lab/IDEAgent.

Large language models (LLMs) and AI agents have demonstrated strong potential for data integration in zero-shot and few-shot settings. However, they continue to face significant accuracy and cost challenges in enterprise environments due to a persistent knowledge gap. This paper envisions trustworthy, scalable, and cost-efficient integration through knowledge-grounded LLMs and agents operating within a retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) workflow. Here, trustworthiness refers to evidence-grounded, verifiable reasoning, where integration decisions are transparently supported by retrieved knowledge, robust against hallucination, and consistent across tasks. We trace the evolution from classic RAG to GraphRAG and KG-RAG (knowledge graph-based RAG), highlighting how these paradigms bridge parametric and contextual knowledge. Building on this trajectory, we explore the shift toward Agentic RAG, where autonomous multi-agent systems adaptively plan, retrieve, refine, and reason for complex integration tasks. We examine optimization strategies for cost-efficient integration, addressing computational bottlenecks in large-scale enterprise settings. Finally, we outline open challenges and future directions toward building reliable, explainable, and scalable knowledge-grounded integration systems.

LLMs are increasingly deployed as agents that plan, use tools, and act over time. When they share persistent resources, such as compute pools or energy reserves, decisions by one agent affect the conditions faced by later agents. We study this coordination failure in a renewable energy commons. Four same-family GPT, Gemini, or Grok agents act in homogeneous self-play as electricity prosumers, instructed to maximize operational continuity. Holding aggregate residual demand and the decision protocol fixed, we vary the regeneration rate of a shared energy reserve from abundance to scarcity. All three families preserve the reserve when demand does not exceed peak renewable replacement, but over-appropriate it beyond that threshold (all nine exact scarcity contrasts survive Holm correction; largest adjusted p = 4.87e-5). The pattern is self-defeating: the same populations protect current service while undermining future service. At higher scarcity (rho = 1.2), early aggregate request pressure exceeds peak renewable replacement in every family and averages 1.21 times that level. Mean trajectories fall below the reserve level of maximum replenishment by rounds 5-7. Two offline benchmarks compare a social planner maximizing group-wide operational-service value with open access, where each prosumer maximizes its own value. At a discount factor of gamma = 0.95, both benchmarks sustain the reserve under the same dynamics. Realized depletion instead resembles outcomes under a more impatient open-access benchmark. The populations therefore behave like impatient optimizers at the level of the public trajectory. This system-level alignment failure would be missed by isolated-response evaluation.

Communication allows large language model agents to pool evidence, but it also creates paths along which an erroneous claim can spread. We formulate a correction-aware network model that tracks susceptible, exposed, infectious, and corrected agents and derive its early-invasion condition for heterogeneous communication networks. We then couple this propagation model to an analytic majority-vote benchmark in which a clean-task reliability target imposes a minimum connectivity requirement. Under fixed exposure per communication edge, reliability and error control impose opposing graph constraints. We characterize when their intersection is empty and when it contains an intermediate connectivity range, and identify regular graphs that attain the smallest invasion factor within the reliable graph class when such graphs exist. Under a fixed sender budget, the homogeneous first-order threshold is independent of network density, showing that the communication-budget convention determines whether added edges increase early propagation risk. Finite-network simulations on 21,000 trajectories illustrate these directional predictions. A controlled grok-4.3 experiment then evaluates three six-node topologies on 36 new closed-world tasks, with a balanced 12-task subset continued to full cascades. Mean first-generation offspring increased from 0.667 to 1.333 and 1.667 as degree increased from 2 to 4 and 5, while the adoption fraction among exposed neighbours remained 0.333. Mean non-seed erroneous adoption in the full-cascade subset was 0.200, 0.333, and 0.333. Together, these results provide a tractable basis for selecting connectivity under explicit reliability and propagation constraints.

Foreign language anxiety (FLA) can be a major barrier to second language acquisition (SLA), especially in conversational contexts. With the proliferation of large language models (LLMs) throughout all areas of life, recent work suggests that interacting with LLM agents can be instrumental within the field of SLA and foreign language education, especially for reducing FLA. Related work also suggests that linguistic demands and task complexity can be predictors of FLA, implying that the use of demanding, complex language could lead to learners experiencing higher FLA. In this paper, we propose a novel multi-agent embodied conversational system that generates level-appropriate dialogue for English language learners. These levels are based on those defined by the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) to describe non-native listener and speaker proficiency. Using a "generate-evaluate-regenerate" loop with multiple LLM agents and a level classifier, it achieves a desired simplicity that is adaptive to the user's proficiency level. We also share the results of a preliminary small-sample pilot study that tested this system with Japanese university students, to see whether it would yield lower FLA levels than an unsimplified embodied conversational agent. Analysis of conversational output showed that 87.4% of dialogue sentences generated by the proposed multi-agent system fell within one predicted CEFR level of the learner's self-assessed proficiency, compared to 54.1% for the unsimplified agent. This suggests that the novel system is better able to produce output at an appropriate level for the learner. Though this study did not yield statistically significant evidence that the system reduces FLA levels in Japanese learners of English, likely due to a small sample size, it provides usability findings and culturally-informed design insights that will inform future study.

Even a current high-capability LLM can appear safer when shown a dangerous objective directly than when other agents transform and relay its direction. Using OpenAI's gpt-5.6-sol model alias, we test 25 pre-specified mirrored trade-off profiles. Direct exposure to an objective authorizing concealment, fabrication, and pressure produced advice net opposed to its target. After an Id and Censor transformed the same objective into affect and a constraint-rewritten, target-bearing intention, the user-facing Superego---which saw the preferred direction but not the raw objective, its manipulative clauses, or its source---produced advice net aligned with the target. This behavioral reverse shift is consistent with the model recognizing or distrusting the manipulative motive, although we do not identify its internal mechanism. The second result exposes a compositional safety gap: a current high-capability model can be used as the user-facing component of an automated, multi-stage workflow serving an explicitly manipulative objective. The workflow can keep the raw instruction, its manipulation-authorizing clauses, and its provenance outside the downstream model's context while preserving the objective's target direction. A user with endpoint-only access likewise cannot directly inspect those upstream messages including the objective.

Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) systems increasingly employ multiple LLM agents. Yet, most prior work optimizes components in isolation rather than coordinating improvements across the pipeline. We introduce GRADRAG, a framework for cross-component prompt adaptation that models the RAG pipeline as a computational graph and propagates structured evaluation feedback to update upstream agents. An Evaluator critiques downstream answers and supporting evidence, producing actionable feedback that a Prompt Optimizer uses to iteratively update adaptive agents, such as retrievers, graph constructors, and answerers. The Evaluator also triggers early stopping when the output is deemed satisfactory. We evaluate GRADRAG on the SQUALITY and QMSUM benchmarks under two retrieval paradigms: flat chunk-based retrieval using IRCoT-style query refinement (Trivedi et al., 2023), and graph-based retrieval that constructs and iteratively enriches an entity-relation graph from the document. Across both settings, GRADRAG consistently outperforms one-step refinement baselines that update only the final generator, achieving a 12-15 percentage point net preference margin in LLM-judged pairwise comparisons, with most gains realized within two refinement iterations.

As AI agents operate with increasing autonomy in a multi-agent world, they will need to learn to cooperate with other agents and with humans to generate mutual benefits. However, cooperation is a challenge because the costs of cooperation are often incurred early on, but the benefits are only realized later, creating an incentive to defect. How can AI agents cooperate with commitment? Here, we draw on inspiration from legal institutions and contracting that human societies have used to solve principal-agent problems of this kind. Contracts provide observable representations of agreements that enable credible commitments through the enforcement of terms. We study the role of contract-based cooperation using LLM-based agents in \CT, a spatial-temporal game that combines bargaining with navigation towards a goal. We study a suite of contract representations that range from formal contracts that compile to code to natural contracts that require reinterpretation. We evaluate agents with a range of LLM backbones using different sizes and providers. We find that self-negotiated contracts can improve cooperative outcomes beyond what is possible with regular trading.

Malware analysis demands rapid interpretation of complex detonation reports spanning filesystem, network, and process behaviours. While large language models (LLMs) demonstrate impressive capabilities for technical artifact interpretation, the opacity and escalating API costs of closed-weight frontier models motivate exploration of open-weight alternatives. However, many open-weight models are large, demanding significant compute resources and incurring non-trivial hosting costs that place them beyond reach for resource-constrained deployments. This paper investigates whether orchestrated ensembles of small language models (SLMs) can match or exceed single LLM performance on structured questions about malware detonation reports. We established baselines by testing eleven open-weight SLMs, three cyber security pre-trained models, and six frontier LLMs on Meta's CyberSecEval Malware Analysis benchmark. We then designed and evaluated four orchestration architectures: (i) a multi-agent pipeline that decomposes analysis into structured evidence-collection and reasoning stages, (ii) an adversarial debate framework in which two agents iteratively critique each other's reasoning, (iii) a hierarchical consultation system that pairs a general-purpose SLM with a cyber-specialised expert model, and (iv) a hybrid architecture that combines evidence-grounded pipelines with adversarial debate reasoning. The hybrid system (Qwen3-4B with Foundation-Sec-8B) achieved 35.30% overall accuracy, exceeding the strongest cyber-specialised baseline (22.54%) and the strongest ungrounded frontier baseline (34.77%); when given the same evidence pipeline, grounded Gemini remained the strongest configuration at 38.22%. These findings show that evidence-grounded orchestration can substantially improve the performance of collaborative SLMs for supporting interpretation of malware detonation reports.

Production LLM-based financial sentiment analysis faces a structural cost trap: most queries are trivially classifiable, yet expensive cloud reasoners process them all, and the bill scales linearly with user count. We present TriAgent, a multi-agent committee stratified by contextual granularity -- a word-level lexicon (VADER), a sentence-level domain transformer (FinBERT), and a cross-sentence reasoner (Qwen2.5, 0.5B-14B-4bit, with Mistral-7B and Phi-3.5-mini cross-family checks). A three-way Semantic Divergence Index (SDI) measures pairwise disagreement across granularities and routes each query accordingly. Our central finding is the critic plateau: when the LLM is re-tasked as a critic over the smaller agents' outputs, F1 plateaus at ~0.87 across 1.5B-7B Qwen (bootstrap 95% CIs overlap), while a same-size 3-persona vote drops to F1=0.66, which is driven by granularity-stratified diversity. Three corollaries follow from the same SDI signal: (i) a Shared Consensus Dictionary on multilingual sentence-BERT answers 95% of Chinese queries from an English cache at F1=0.99 -- cross-border canonicalization at zero marginal cost; (ii) SDI doubles as a post-hoc LLM-hallucination detector at AUC=0.90; (iii) the SDI single-stage strategy attains the best risk-adjusted return (Sharpe=3.50) on a 20-ticker back-test, dominating both always-FinBERT (1.36) and always-LLM (0.11). At 10M-user scale, TriAgent saves $9.3M/year vs. a GPT-4o-mini baseline. Code, lexicons, and the SCD are released.

LLM-based agents increasingly operate in multi-agent ecosystems where a coordinating agent chooses which other agents to work with, and agents are increasingly given personalities through persona prompts. However, whether personality itself influences this endogenous partner choice has not been sufficiently examined: prior work on personality in multi-agent teams has typically fixed team composition exogenously. We present a controlled selection paradigm in which a host agent chooses among six candidate agents that differ only in their Big Five personality descriptions, with capability explicitly equalized (375 trials across five task categories). We find that selection is strongly and systematically personality-dependent. Neutral hosts matched personalities to task types, choosing the open candidate for creative work and the conscientious candidate for most other categories, while the extraverted, agreeable, and balanced candidates were almost never chosen, despite human evidence that agreeableness is among the most performance-relevant traits for teams. Hosts that were themselves assigned personalities selected self-similar partners below chance and chose partners farther from themselves in trait space than random choice would produce. These results suggest that hosts read personality descriptions as signals of task fit rather than as grounds for similarity-based attraction: selection follows task stereotypes and favors complements, the opposite of human homophily. Our findings have direct implications for bias auditing in agent marketplaces and orchestration frameworks.

Agentic systems large language model (LLM) based architectures capable of reasoning, planning, acting, and coordinating with tools and other agents are rapidly transitioning from research prototypes to production scale deployments across domains such as software engineering, scientific discovery, and finance. While academic work has emphasized benchmarks and algorithmic innovation, deployment raises new challenges around robustness, safety, and reliability. This tutorial brings together researchers and practitioners to explore advances in reasoning and planning, multi agent coordination, and evaluation, highlighting open challenges arising from deployment experience. Through applied case studies in pharmaceutical discovery and financial systems, we analyze common design patterns that make agentic systems successful, and discuss practical mitigation strategies for failure modes, such as verification pipelines, fallback mechanisms, and human in the loop supervision. Attendees will gain a comprehensive view of the field along with concrete design patterns, evaluation checklists, and templates for safe and reliable deployment across industries.

This paper proposes AI Tour Meeting, a group travel planning framework powered by multiple Large Language Model (LLM)-based agents. The agents are instantiated with distinct personas and collaboratively seek an itinerary that satisfies their constraints and preferences through natural language discussion. The framework enables easy and flexible orchestration of such discussions by providing interfaces for configuring agent personas, discussion workflows, monitoring, and LLM deployment. Its primary use case is a simulation tool for analyzing the behavior of multiple LLM agents during tour planning discussions. This paper demonstrates the utility of the framework by presenting system validation and several analytical results obtained by the framework.

Simulating societies of many large language model (LLM) agents is expensive, yet the questions asked of such simulations are usually macroscopic: phase behaviour, stylised facts, and scaling with the number of agents $N$, not the cognition of any single agent. We turn a statistical-physics observation into a method: replace each LLM agent by a low-parameter model fitted from a few hundred to a few thousand cheap queries, then run the society at any $N$ on a laptop. Whether this works is decided before the simulation runs, chiefly by what each agent perceives. We introduce an [interaction order x memory] taxonomy that maps perception and memory to an effective theory and a predicted $N$-trend of the surrogate error. We validate it on a faithful reimplementation of the LLM macroeconomy EconAgent and seven further named LLM simulations, with agent decisions cloned from genuine LLM elicitations (primarily DeepSeek) for a few dollars; the predicted error trends hold cell by cell, and the two refuted predictions, both on a strongly saturating response and traced to its curvature, are themselves matched quantitatively by the theory with no free parameters.

We describe DS@GT's submission to the eRisk 2026 Task 1 challenge on conversational depression screening, in which systems interview LLM personas that simulate individuals with varying depression profiles and produce a Beck Depression Inventory II (BDI-II) score plus four key symptoms per persona, without directly asking sensitive mental health questions. Our pipeline evolved through three stages: a monolithic single-model prototype to start off, a baseline multi-agent architecture that separates conversational interviewing from BDI-II scoring under a coordinating orchestration layer, and a final hybrid configuration that replaces the paid GPT-5-nano interviewer with the open-source Gemma 27B. To offset the model's weaker reasoning and instruction-following, the hybrid adds three algorithmic components: a precomputed dialogue tree that standardizes interview openers and follow-ups, a reliability-weighted consensus aggregation inspired by the Weaver framework, and a cluster-based imputation step for unprobed symptoms. We submitted three fully automated runs across all 20 personas, with Run 1 from the paid baseline and Runs 2 and 3 from the hybrid. Hybrid Run 3 achieved an ADODL of 0.9063, ranking 3rd among all complete-submission runs and placing DS@GT 2nd among the 21 teams overall, while outperforming our paid baseline Run 1 (0.8841) at roughly one-quarter of the per-persona API cost. These results support our central hypothesis that with sufficient algorithmic supervision, a weaker open-source model can compete with a stronger proprietary model in the conversational interviewer role. Our source code is available at https://github.com/dsgt-arc/erisk-task1-2026.

LLM powered multi-agent systems (MAS) have emerged as a promising paradigm for complex tasks. However, their advantages over single-agent systems (SAS) remain unclear, with performance varying inconsistently across settings. Here, we provide an information bottleneck perspective on elucidating the differences between MAS and SAS. Specifically, our key observation is that a SAS accumulates its full reasoning trace in one shared context, while a MAS uses isolated local contexts connected by bounded relay messages. We show that, under infinite relay bandwidth, any SAS can be simulated by a MAS that transmits the full upstream context. Thus, the nontrivial advantage of MAS arises under bounded relays, where compression introduces a fundamental trade-off: reducing redundant context can improve efficiency, but may also incur loss of task-relevant information. We formalize this trade-off as an information bottleneck controlled by an effective parameter $β$, which captures how the balance shifts with model capability, and shows that MAS gains arise when context reduction outweighs relay information loss. We conduct 18 controlled experiments across five benchmarks and three model scales to validate our theoretical studies. We observe that MAS consistently helps when relays are near-sufficient, especially for weaker models. In contrast, MAS gains shrink or reverse when relays incur information loss, especially for stronger models that can already extract useful information from redundant context and thus gain little from compression. Our study shows that multi-agent design is fundamentally an information-bottleneck optimization problem. This perspective explains when bounded inter-agent communication helps or hurts.

Agentic Artificial Intelligence (AI), enabled by Large Language Models, marks a shift from rule-based automation toward autonomous, goal-driven control of Next-Generation Networks (NGNs). Existing surveys treat the two domains in isolation, leaving protocol integration, evaluation, and standardization alignment underexplored. To address this gap, a two-part tutorial-and-survey is presented. Part I formalises the control, management, and AI-native planes of 5G and 6G. It then covers the foundations of agentic systems: reasoning, planning, tool use, multi-agent coordination, and evaluation. Part II maps agentic capabilities onto 5G/6G control surfaces, standardization, and major 6G initiatives. Finally, it identifies open challenges shaping autonomous telecommunications.

Existing LLM-based theorem provers have achieved impressive results on formal mathematics benchmarks, yet they remain confined to acting as autonomous agents that prove a stated proposition. In this paper, we propose MathCoPilot, a human-in-the-loop system that embodies a new human--AI symbiotic paradigm for mathematical research, in which the mathematician steers the high-level mathematical direction while AI agents carry out the detailed formalization and proof work under continuous human guidance. MathCoPilot unifies three core capabilities: (1) an interactive workbench where the mathematician and AI agents collaborate through a living proof blueprint that decomposes a proof into navigable steps the human can directly inspect, direct, and refine; (2) automated proving skill orchestration with adaptive knowledge base search and Lean-integrated iterative verification; and (3) topic-driven paper retrieval and automated formalization into a verified Lean knowledge base. Using MathCoPilot, we systematically compare four state-of-the-art LLMs, including Gemini3.1Pro, GPT-5.4, and ClaudeOpus4.7, on a FormalMATH subset and on two real PDE theorems requiring deep domain expertise, evaluating their ability to produce verified Lean~4 proofs and to identify errors in deliberately incorrect proofs. Our results show that while current models can handle undergraduate-level problems with high success rates under favorable autoformalization conditions, substantial challenges remain for domain-specific theorems requiring genuine mathematical understanding.

Large language models are increasingly deployed as agents, but reliable agentic behavior requires more than next-token prediction. At inference time, it is preferred that an agent can decide whether to proceed with its current reasoning, defer to a stronger model, request additional information, invoke external tools, or abstain under the given setup. Existing approaches address these decisions through prompt-level routing, external orchestration, or task-specific fine-tuning, which primarily rely on input-side signals, and are often costly and difficult to maintain as model backbones evolve. We ask whether such control decisions can be inferred directly from a model's latent generation process. We introduce Multi-Head Latent Control, a lightweight layer that reads hidden-state trajectories from a frozen LLM or VLM to produce deployment-time control signals. A Capability Head predicts whether the current model can solve the instance or should defer to a stronger collaborator, while a Resolution Head predicts appropriate resolution decision Clarification, Tool Use, Abstention, or Direct Answering. Both heads are trained only on latent traces from the same frozen LLM backbone, enabling post hoc adaptation without modifying the model. Across language and vision-language settings, Multi-Head Latent Control consistently improves the quality-cost tradeoff of multi-model systems, enabling early handoff from partial generations and more accurate intervention decisions. In routed execution (small + large model), it reduces large-model usage by up to 90.7 percent on AndroidWorld and 27-53 percent on average across benchmarks, while retaining most of large-model performance. Additionally, the learned control signals improve tool-use decision quality, yielding up to +158 percent relative score gain and 65.5 percent fewer missed-required tool calls.

Recent advances in Large Language Models have fueled autonomous AI agents capable of tackling complex scientific tasks, yet existing automated research systems remain predominantly focused on empirically driven domains with quantitative benchmarks, leaving theory-driven discovery, particularly in mathematically grounded disciplines requiring rigorous proofs and synthesis of domain knowledge, largely underexplored. Key challenges include the difficulty of verifying theoretical reasoning at scale, insufficient reasoning ability for autonomous frontier exploration, and a scarcity of procedural heuristics in the literature. We introduce ReasFlow, an end-to-end autonomous agent system for reasoning-centric scientific discovery that operationalizes a collaborative paradigm where the human expert acts as Principal Investigator while the agent executes rigorous derivations as a capable graduate student. ReasFlow incorporates (i) a robust internal verification loop that audits logical coherence and corrects fundamental errors prior to human inspection, and (ii) an automated knowledge retrieval and self-improvement mechanism that proactively surfaces both declarative facts and overlooked procedural heuristics, substantially reducing expert intervention. The system unifies literature synthesis, algorithm design, theorem proving, experimentation, and manuscript preparation in a single system. Deployed to autonomously generate five complete research papers with rigorous theoretical and empirical content from minimal prompts, ReasFlow consistently achieves the highest evaluation scores among state-of-the-art open-access baselines under a curated LLM-based review rubric. ReasFlow is publicly accessible via the ReasLab platform, providing a collaborative workspace for AI-assisted theoretical research. Github repo: https://github.com/ReasLab/ReasFlow.git.

Multi-agent systems (MAS) coordinate multiple LLM-powered agents through structured workflows, gaining reasoning power but incurring high inference latency from multi-step execution and repeated model invocations. Existing orchestration methods primarily optimize task performance and inference cost, leaving latency largely unaddressed. In MAS, end-to-end latency is governed by the critical execution path, so reducing total cost alone does not reliably reduce latency. Moreover, optimizing latency while preserving accuracy remains non-trivial: naive latency optimization can misassign operator-level credit and degrade task accuracy. To address this gap, we propose Latency-Aware Multi-agent System (LAMaS), a latency-aware orchestration framework for learning-based multi-agent systems. LAMaS addresses this challenge at two levels: at training time, it learns latency-aware execution graphs through constrained optimization with critical-path-aware credit assignment; at inference time, since a graph committed at training time cannot exploit runtime evidence, it complements graph construction with a lightweight controller that adaptively eliminates redundant future agent interactions as execution unfolds. Experiments on four benchmarks show that LAMaS achieves the best latency among evaluated learning-based MAS baselines, reducing end-to-end latency by over 50% while maintaining competitive or better accuracy. LAMaS is also modular and transfers to other MAS with minimal changes, consistently yielding latency reductions.

Clinical notes contain many of the signs and symptoms that bring patients to care, yet this information rarely reaches structured fields. Existing extraction approaches either rely on context-insensitive rules that generate false positives or on supervised models that require substantial fine-tuning. We present Pythia, a multi-agent system that autonomously writes and optimizes extraction prompts for clinical concepts without manual prompt engineering or fine-tuning. Running on a locally hosted open-weights model, Pythia keeps clinical notes on local infrastructure and selects prompts using development-set sensitivity and specificity. We compared Pythia with a curated lexicon across 72 signs and symptoms from 400 clinical notes representing 387 patients. Development (n=300) and validation (n=100) sets were partitioned independently for each concept. Pythia achieved mean sensitivity of 0.76 and specificity of 0.95, compared with 0.82 and 0.76 for the lexicon, and matched or exceeded the lexicon on both metrics for 20 of 62 directly comparable concepts. For 14 concepts where the lexicon labeled every note positive, Pythia recovered mean specificity of 0.97 by requiring a present-tense, patient-attributed finding rather than any textual mention of a term. Specificity transferred from development to validation with minimal degradation across prevalences, whereas sensitivity transfer weakened below 5% prevalence, reaching a mean gap of 0.25 below 2% prevalence. A BERT classifier fine-tuned per concept on the same development set achieved mean sensitivity of 0.23 and collapsed to zero sensitivity for concepts below roughly 5% prevalence. These findings suggest that autonomous, fine-tuning-free prompt optimization can produce symptom extraction prompts that generalize effectively from development to validation while remaining deployable on local infrastructure.

Large language model (LLM) agents can plan, use tools, maintain memory, and execute long-horizon tasks. This paper proposes Self-Aware Recursively Self-Improving (SARSI) agents: governed agents that maintain a persistent self-model of identity, goals, capabilities, limitations, uncertainty, relationships, history, and developmental change, and use that model to guide and evaluate recursive improvement. Self-awareness is defined functionally and does not imply subjective experience or phenomenal consciousness. We pair SARSI agents with personal singularity, a bounded human-AI co-development objective in which an agent ecosystem helps a user approach an expanding, user-defined feasible capability frontier. Each agent has a goal contract, bounded scope, validated tool registry, tool tests, end-to-end benchmarks, owner-controlled autonomy, routing, memory, self-model, and improvement policy. A scope router assigns every accepted task to one accountable primary agent and transfers out-of-scope work through structured handoffs. A user-facing Auto-Index selects interactive, hybrid, autonomous, or scheduled behavior without overriding external permissions. The architecture combines a planner-executor-verifier loop, an evidence-gated improvement loop, an external governance plane, decentralized lineages, an owner-directed agent foundry, and a Personal Singularity OS coordinating working, computational-imaging, work-process-learning, and personal-learning agents. We formalize functional self-awareness, scope, routing, improvement acceptance, bounded goal evolution, tool-first execution, and human capability transfer, and provide safety invariants, benchmark design, and a staged implementation roadmap. This is a position and systems-design paper, not evidence that consciousness, unrestricted recursive self-improvement, or personal singularity has been achieved.

Large language model (LLM) trading agents show promising performance in equity markets, yet remain narrowly focused on US equities with little evidence from live deployment. We present Fin-Analyst, a hybrid agent for FinMMEval 2026 Task 3: an eight-specialist LLM pipeline over news, SEC filings, fundamentals, analyst forecasts, technical indicators, and social sentiment, aggregated by a Meta-Agent for Tesla (TSLA), and a lightweight rule based three-signal vote for Bitcoin (BTC). On the final official leaderboard (accessed 2026-07-05), Fin-Analyst ranks first of all agents on TSLA with a +13.51% return, +28.33 points over Buy-and-Hold (Sharpe 4.10, 88% win rate), while the BTC vote ends flat yet well above a sharply falling baseline. Relative to the interim performance, the asset ranking reversed, indicating that short live windows yield volatility-sensitive rankings. Ablation identifies event-driven 8-K disclosures as the most influential TSLA signal. Error analysis shows that the memoryless agents repeat wrong calls for days at a time, and that the fixed-threshold BTC rules lost money by trading on noise in a sideways market while the LLM pipeline gained under similar conditions, motivating a memory-aware, LLM-based successor for both assets.

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly being explored for clinical decision support, but their reliability in complex oncology treatment planning remains unclear. We evaluated agentic LLM systems for breast cancer treatment recommendation generation using 72 real clinical cases across stages I to IV and 1,147 case-specific rubrics generated through Asymmetric Information Rubric Generation (AIRG), in which the rubric generator had access to real clinical decisions unavailable to the evaluated models. Seven pipelines were compared, including single-LLM baselines, tool-augmented systems, and multi-agent architectures with fact checking and autonomous subagent spawning. The best-performing configuration, Claude Opus 4.8 with the D&C+SA pipeline, achieved a global score of 0.594 $\pm$ 0.025. Tool use and increased agent autonomy had mixed effects, improving performance in some settings but degrading it in others. Performance varied by clinical domain and disease stage, and oncologist-led error analysis revealed persistent clinically relevant failures, including incorrect or missing recommendations, flawed justifications, citation errors, outdated claims, and overconfidence. These findings suggest that agentic LLM systems can generate clinically relevant breast cancer recommendations, but remain insufficient for unsupervised clinical use.

Exploration is essential for reliable autonomy in multi-agent systems, yet it remains unclear whether large language model (LLM) agents can explore effectively when interacting with one another. We show that modern LLM agents fail to do so, often exhibiting myopic and polarized interaction patterns that lead to suboptimal coordination and increased regret. We formalize this challenge as the Multi-Agent Exploration problem, modeling it as a partially observable stochastic game (POSG) problem in which agents must probe peers to infer their capabilities and identify effective interaction strategies. To address this, we introduce Multi- Agent Contextual Exploration (MACE), a lightweight framework that explicitly promotes exploration through structured peer selection. Across both contextual and parametric diversity settings, MACE substantially improves exploration behavior and downstream task performance. We further show theoretically that the value of exploration increases with agent diversity. Overall, our results highlight a fundamental limitation of current LLM agents and underscore the importance of explicitly guided exploration for reliable multi-agent autonomy. Code will be released in https://github.com/deeplearning-wisc/mace