REVIEW 5 cited by
Adaptive In-conversation Team Building for Language Model Agents
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
Leveraging multiple large language model (LLM) agents has shown to be a promising approach for tackling complex tasks, while the effective design of multiple agents for a particular application remains an art. It is thus intriguing to answer a critical question: Given a task, how can we build a team of LLM agents to solve it effectively? Our new adaptive team-building paradigm offers a flexible solution, realized through a novel agent design named Captain Agent. It dynamically forms and manages teams for each step of a task-solving process, utilizing nested group conversations and reflection to ensure diverse expertise and prevent stereotypical outputs, allowing for a flexible yet structured approach to problem-solving. A comprehensive evaluation across six real-world scenarios demonstrates that Captain Agent significantly outperforms existing multi-agent methods with 21.94% improvement in average accuracy, providing outstanding performance without requiring task-specific prompt engineering. Our exploration of different backbone LLM and cost analysis further shows that Captain Agent can improve the conversation quality of weak LLM and achieve competitive performance with extremely low cost, which illuminates the application of multi-agent systems.
Forward citations
Cited by 5 Pith papers
-
Who&When Pro: Can LLMs Really Attribute Failures in AI Agents?
A warm-start error-injection pipeline yields 12,326 golden-labeled multimodal agent failures, and current LLMs remain weak at step-and-mode failure attribution.
-
Multi-Agent Debate Strategies: Survey, Taxonomy, and Challenges
A systematic review of 141 papers derives a three-axis taxonomy of multi-agent debate design (participants, interaction, agreement) and shows the field has converged on a narrow default pattern.
-
Self-Evolving Multi-Agent Systems via Textual Backpropagation
A text-feedback-based framework for automatically optimizing teams of LLM agents outperforms several existing multi-agent systems across coding, math, data analysis, and writing benchmarks.
-
MenTeR: A fully-automated Multi-agenT workflow for end-to-end RF/Analog Circuits Netlist Design
MenTeR is a multi-agent LLM system that claims to automate RF/analog circuit netlist design, achieving 84.2% Pass@1 on a 24-task benchmark, but its self-generated testbench validation is shown to sometimes certify inc...
-
ScoreFlow: Mastering LLM Agent Workflows via Score-based Preference Optimization
ScoreFlow uses a score-weighted variant of direct preference optimization to automatically generate and refine per-task LLM agent workflows, reporting an average 8.2% improvement over baselines on six benchmarks.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.